Professional Articles and Academic Articles
Each issue of The International Journal for Court Administration features a professional and an academic section. Submitted manuscripts for the professional section are reviewed and evaluated by the editors. Submitted manuscripts for the academic section are evaluated anonymously by carefully vetted scholars and practitioners. IJCA has a policy of masked review for submissions for the academic section (double blind peer review). References that reveal the identity of authors are deleted from the body of the manuscript for the academic section during the review process.
The peer review process is a double blind one. Only academic articles are subjected to a double blind peer review process. The Editor in Chief assigns the organization of the review of an academic article to one of the members of the editorial board.
When submissions are received from prospective authors, IJCA editors approach experts from academia and practice to conduct peer reviews. Reviewers are asked to provide formative feedback, even if an article is not deemed suitable for publication in the journal. In cases in which the two reviewers reach opposing conclusions, the editors may request a third reviewer to examine the submission.
The review period is expected to take between four and six weeks. Although our reviewers are registered in our database, their identifies are not shared with the authors. Upon completion of the reviews and submission of the reviewer's comments, editors send the comments in anonymous format to the authors for guidance in revising and refining their submissions. Based on the reviewer's comments, the handling editor will make a recommendation for rejection, minor or major revisions, or acceptance.
Important criteria to assess an article, are:
- Does the article make clear the contribution it aims to make to the field of contemporary court administration and management? In your view, is the contribution useful? Important? Substantive?
- Does it connect to previous studies and/or draw connections to contemporary literature in the field?
- Is the written expression of the paper clear, concise and accessible to readers with an interest in this field?
- Is the quality of English suitable for reading by an international audience?
- Are the questions or issues clearly formulated?
- Are the arguments logically structured and clearly presented?
- Are the conclusions soundly based?
- Does the article connect adequately to ongoing debates in the field of justice and court administration?
Based on the reviews, the editors decide whether:
- The article is fit for publication.
- The article should be published after revision of the points highlighted by the referees.
- The article should only be published after a thorough revision.
- The article is not fit for publication.
Once an article has been revised and accepted, the author(s) will receive a PDF proof of their article by email. Only essential corrections can be made at this stage.
Your report should be submitted in English and should be returned to the responsible editors within six weeks, or sooner. Your comments and recommendation will be treated in strict confidence. However, we reserve the right to pass on all, or part, of your comments to the author anonymously. Reviewers are explicitly asked to record formative feedback on a review form provided by the editor.
When you assess an article it is important to consider both the structure and content. We expect you to give:
- A helpful assessment of the article’s strengths, and diagnosis of its problem areas;
- Clear, constructive advice on how to improve the article; and
- A friendly tone that genuinely seeks to improve the strength of the paper
The above mentioned points (relevance, readability, reasoning and references) should be taken into consideration, recognising that not all the points apply to every article and that some articles may prompt additional questions.
The International Journal for Court Administration is committed to upholding the highest standards of quality and integrity in the publication of its articles.
The editors will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall the Journal or its editors encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
The International Journal for Court Administration adheres to the best practices in the ethics of scholarly publishing stated in the COPE’s (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for all parties involved: Authors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
The Editorial Board of the Journal undertakes to publish all corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies as soon as possible if and when they are required.
Authors are required to ensure that the submission has not been previously published, that permission has been obtained for the use of copyrighted material and that they do not infringe on the rights of third parties.
To ensure a reliable and open publication process, all authors, reviewers and editors are required to declare any interests that could appear to compromise, conflict or influence the validity of the publication.
The International Journal for Court Administration relies in part on funding from sponsors and advertisers. Advertisements and banners can be placed on the website and in articles. Advertisers and sponsors do not influence the editorial process. The Journal only displays advertisements that are likely to be of interest to the readership. Advertisements or banners shall in no way be offensive and will exclude information that undermines the credibility of the Journal.
This website contains several free of use images and materials. Every effort has been made to trace rights holders, but if any have been inadvertently overlooked, the publishers would be pleased to make the necessary arrangements at the first opportunity.