IJEP invites qualified academics to join our volunteer peer-review panel. This prospectus explains what reviewers do, what IJEP expects, and how to express interest in joining.
1. Purpose
The International Journal of Emerging Philosophy (IJEP) is committed to publishing rigorous philosophical work from emerging scholars. Reviewer expertise is central to maintaining scholarly quality while supporting timely, constructive feedback.
2. Who should consider reviewing
IJEP welcomes reviewers who have demonstrated competence in philosophy (or closely related cognate areas) and who can evaluate submissions with scholarly care, methodological fairness, and professional discretion.
- Academic competence: advanced graduate study, established scholarship, or equivalent research/teaching expertise.
- Subfield fit: familiarity with relevant literatures, debates, and argumentative standards.
- Professional reliability: the ability to respond to invitations and submit reports within reasonable timeframes.
3. What reviewers do
When invited, you will be asked to assess whether a manuscript is suitable for IJEP and, if so, what revisions are needed to strengthen it. IJEP expects reviewers to provide focused, evidence-based feedback that helps authors improve arguments, clarify concepts, and engage relevant secondary literature.
- Scope and fit: Does the work belong in IJEP and contribute to the journal’s aims?
- Scholarly contribution: Is the thesis clear and supported by argument?
- Engagement with literature: Are key debates discussed accurately and responsibly?
- Argument quality: Are inferences justified? Are objections addressed?
- Professional tone: Critique the work; do not critique the author.
4. IJEP’s review model
IJEP uses a strictly double-blind peer review process. Reviewer identities are kept confidential, and authors are required to submit fully anonymised manuscripts.
5. Confidentiality and integrity
Reviewers are expected to treat all manuscripts, reviews, and communications as confidential. Please do not share materials with colleagues or students unless explicitly authorised by the editorial office.
If you believe you cannot review fairly (for example, because of prior knowledge that breaks the double-blind conditions), you should decline the assignment and notify the editors.
6. Conflict of interest (COI)
Before accepting an assignment, reviewers must disclose any relevant conflicts of interest. IJEP relies on reviewers to be transparent so that editorial decisions can preserve fairness and credibility.
7. Time commitments and responsiveness
IJEP aims for timely decisions. Reviewers should respond to invitations promptly and submit high-quality reports within the requested timeframe. While circumstances vary, accepting an invitation is understood as a commitment to complete the review once agreed.
8. Support for reviewers
New reviewers receive guidance on IJEP’s expectations for report content and structure. If you have questions about reviewing standards, confidentiality, or scope-fit, the editorial team is available to help.
9. Volunteer status
IJEP is a volunteer peer-review ecosystem. Reviewers contribute professional expertise without remuneration, motivated by scholarly service and the desire to strengthen philosophical dialogue for emerging scholars.
How to express interest
Ready to consider joining IJEP’s volunteer reviewer panel? Click here to join the waitlist, or email us directly.