Editorial Policies

Peer Review Process

The Editorial Board will identify a theme for each issue of the UCR and make the call for articles widely known throughout the academic and research communities as well as amongst public intellectuals. The Journal will receive submissions from authors both within and outside the University of Colombo, within and outside the academia, and within and outside Sri Lanka.

All articles published in the UCR apart from editorials, editorial comments, letters to the Editors and keynote addresses will be peer-reviewed. The Editors will examine submitted articles for academic rigor and relevance to the theme and short list them for the peer review process. At this stage, the Editors may ask authors to rework their articles to make them more suitable for publication. Authors of articles which are not short listed will be informed of the general reasons for non-acceptance.

Articles suitable for peer review will be sent to two reviewers identified by the Editorial Board. The reviewers will be selected on the basis of their expertise relating to each article, and as far as possible one reviewer will be from the University of Colombo and the other from outside. The reviewers will be provided with a standard set of instructions for writing their peer review so that there is minimum variability in the approach of each reviewer. The peer review process will be double-blind. All peer reviews (anonymized unless specifically requested by a reviewer) will be sent to authors as feedback.

Each reviewer will be asked to provide one of three decisions regarding an article: Accepted, Revisions suggested, or Rejected. An article that is rejected by both reviewers will not be chosen for publication and the corresponding author(s)will be informed of this decision. An article that is rejected by only one reviewer will be studied by the Editors, especially taking into account the recommendation given by the other reviewer, and a decision taken as to whether the article should be revised or rejected. An article that requires revision will be sent back to the corresponding author(s), with suggested revisions and a deadline. Revised resubmissions will be checked by the Editors in relation to the reviewers’ initial review comments. If required, further revisions may be requested by the Editors. The final decision on acceptance or rejection rests with the Editors.

The authors will be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided in their articles and for the rigor and objectivity of their arguments. They will be responsible for safeguarding ethical standards in relation to their work, including academic integrity and honesty, relevant ethics clearance, institutional permission and regulatory approval for any original research. The authors should also declare any relevant conflict of interest. They should cite the work of others where relevant. The UCR will check each article for plagiarism. The authors are also responsible for providing access to raw data relating to the submission both to the Editorial board and to other researchers if appropriate. Such data will need to be retained for the duration that accords with the law.

Section Policies

Editorial

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Articles

  • Open Submissions
  • Indexed
  • Peer Reviewed

Quick links