Peer Review Process


JIPE adheres to a double-blind peer-review process, as part of which the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process. A peer-review is mandatory for original research papers, review articles, brief reports, and innovation spotlights prior to acceptance for publication on JIPE’s online portal and digital issues. 

A double-blind peer-review process limits bias by focusing purely on content. Peer-reviews improve quality of papers, ensure previous research work in the particular research area is acknowledged, detects plagiarism and plays a central role in academic course development. An added value of participating in peer-review is keeping up to date with the latest developments in research and innovation.

Articles are usually reviewed by one to two reviewers, who are selected based on their areas of expertise and related experience. Reviewers provide feedback on the paper’s strengths and weaknesses. 

We expect that most submissions will require some revisions.

If authors wish to know what reviewers are looking for in the manuscripts, they may refer to the Reviewer Request Form.

Expressions of willingness to serve as a reviewer are welcomed and encouraged. Please register on and you can choose the role of a reviewer in the options provided. Alternatively, please reach out to us at with your interest.

Guideline for Reviewers

JIPE takes a developmental approach to articles, providing constructive feedback, particularly to authors who may have had limited experience publishing in peer-reviewed journals. 

Our goal is to foster constructive facilitation; while we are committed to a high level of academic rigour, we also recognize that many authors submitting to the journal may be new to the peer-review process. In that light, reviews should be written in a collegial and supportive tone, with an eye toward making the final product the best it can possibly be. 

We encourage authors to also consider the role of being reviewers for reciprocity.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the principal strengths, weaknesses and points of consideration of the manuscript. We ask that reviewers provide specific and constructive suggestions in their feedback. Reviewers may share confidential remarks to the editor that will not be shared with the author(s) of the manuscript.

If revisions are requested and made, the original reviewers may be asked to review the revised version to determine whether the authors have sufficiently addressed the concerns. 

Once revisions have been reviewed, JIPE will make one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept the paper for publication
  • Request further revisions before a final decision can be made
  • Reject the submission

Reviewers are encouraged to read the following articles, which contain valuable advice on the process of peer-review.

JIPE gratefully acknowledges the efforts of our reviewers. 

Reviewers (names only) will be recognized annually on