The peer-review process consists of such steps:
1. Submission of Paper: An author submits the article to the journal "Humanitarian Vision" via e-mail.
2. Editorial Office Assessment: The Executive Secretaries check the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point, only formal parameters of the submitted article.
3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC): The EIC checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.
4.Invitation to Reviewers: The EIC sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained (two peer-reviews).
5. Response to Invitations: Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.
6. The review is Conducted: The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered. Duration of review's preparation may last from 3 to 6 months.
7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews: The EIC considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.
8. The Decision is Communicated: The EIC sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. The comments are anonymous.
9. Accepted papers are sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the EIC should include constructive anonymous comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the EIC.
10. Reviews of monographs, surveys of philosophical events, translations also are peer-reviewed internally by the members of the editorial board or the editor-in-chief and his or her deputies.