Peer-Review Policy

The Nature-Nurture Journal of Psychology (NNJP) upholds a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to assess the quality and integrity of all submitted manuscripts. The peer-review system ensures that only original, scientifically valid, and significant research is published.

Independent experts in the relevant field evaluate each manuscript for originality, validity, and relevance. These assessments assist the editorial team in determining whether the manuscript meets the high standards required for publication.

In cases where the journal is unable to identify an adequate number of suitable peer reviewers, the services of our publishing partner, Research Square, may be utilized. Research Square will assist in sourcing qualified reviewers and generating detailed reports to minimize delays. Reviewers recruited by Research Square are compensated with a modest honorarium for completing their evaluations within the designated timeframe. This honorarium is provided regardless of the reviewer’s recommendation.

For manuscripts reviewed through Research Square, the peer review reports are anonymized unless the reviewer chooses to disclose their identity. In line with our commitment to transparency, we operate a double-blind peer-review process, where neither the authors nor the reviewers are aware of each other’s identities.

If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the peer review reports are published alongside the article under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, though the identities of reviewers are not disclosed unless they opt to sign their reports. This transparent peer review approach promotes openness in the review process and serves an educational function by contributing to the ongoing discourse on best practices in peer review.

Peer Review Types

NNJP utilizes multiple peer-review models depending on the nature of the manuscript and the reviewers’ preferences. The types of peer review we may use are:

1. Single-blind: The reviewers know the identities of the authors, but the authors remain unaware of the reviewers' identities unless the reviewer chooses to sign their report.
2. Double-blind: Both the authors and the reviewers are anonymous to each other, ensuring impartiality in the review process.
3. Open peer review: Both the authors and the reviewers know each other’s identities. If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the signed peer review reports are published alongside the article.
4. Transparent peer review: The reviewers know the identities of the authors, but the authors do not know the reviewers unless the reviewer chooses to sign their report. Accepted manuscripts with this review type will have anonymized reports published with the article.

Why Peer Review is Essential

Peer review plays an indispensable role in the scientific publishing process by ensuring the credibility and accuracy of manuscripts. The peer review process adds value to submitted research in several ways:

• Enhancing robustness: Peer reviewers identify gaps or weaknesses in the research, suggesting additional experiments or clarification to strengthen the manuscript.
• Improving readability: Reviewers provide feedback to enhance clarity and readability, making the paper more accessible to readers.
• Increasing relevance: Reviewers assess the manuscript’s significance within the broader context of the field, ensuring the research contributes meaningfully to existing knowledge.

Peer Review Process Overview

Manuscripts submitted to NNJP undergo a structured review process to assess their scientific merit. If the manuscript meets the initial editorial criteria, it is forwarded to qualified peer reviewers who make detailed recommendations for improvement. Based on the reviewers’ feedback, the editorial team determines whether to accept, reject, or request revisions to the manuscript.

NNJP ensures that all manuscripts are subject to the highest standards of scientific scrutiny before publication. The editorial decision is based solely on the scientific validity of the research and its contribution to the field, not on the perceived interest or impact of the study.

Editorial Oversight

The overall editorial responsibility for the journal lies with the Editor-in-Chief, with Section Editors overseeing manuscripts submitted to specific sections. Associate Editors may serve as handling editors for particular manuscripts. The peer review process is managed by the editorial team to ensure adherence to established best practices and guidelines.