Peer Review and Editorial Process
Pyrrhic Press Publishing uses editorial screening and independent peer review to evaluate scholarly research submitted to its peer reviewed journals.
The purpose of peer review is to provide qualified, independent scholarly evaluation before publication.
Initial Editorial Screening
Every submitted research manuscript is first evaluated by an editor before external peer review.
The initial screening may consider:
- Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
- Completeness of the manuscript
- Basic scholarly quality
- Methodological appropriateness
- Originality concerns
- Research integrity concerns
- Citation and reference quality
- Ethical requirements
- Authorship information
- Conflict of interest disclosures
- Funding disclosures
- Data availability information
- Compliance with author instructions
A manuscript may be declined during initial editorial screening without external peer review when it clearly falls outside the journal's scope, does not satisfy minimum scholarly standards, or presents a substantial problem that makes external review inappropriate.
External Peer Review
Research articles that pass initial editorial screening and are intended for publication as peer reviewed research are normally evaluated by at least two qualified independent reviewers.
Reviewers are selected based on relevant subject matter, methodological, academic, professional, or research expertise.
Reviewers must be sufficiently independent of the authors and manuscript to provide an impartial scholarly evaluation.
Review Model
Pyrrhic Press uses double anonymous peer review for research articles unless a journal or article clearly identifies another approved review model.
Under double anonymous review, reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors and author identities are withheld from reviewers to the extent reasonably practicable during the review process.
Authors should therefore remove unnecessary identifying information from the manuscript submitted for review when instructed to do so.
Reviewer Selection
Editors select reviewers based on the expertise required to evaluate the manuscript.
Reviewer selection may consider disciplinary expertise, methodological knowledge, professional experience, publication history, research experience, and absence of material conflicts.
An author may suggest potential reviewers when requested, but Pyrrhic Press is not required to use an author suggested reviewer.
Authors may identify individuals who they believe present a material conflict. The editor will consider the request but retains responsibility for reviewer selection.
Reviewer Independence
Reviewers should disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably interfere with impartial evaluation.
A reviewer should decline an assignment when a material conflict exists or when the manuscript falls substantially outside the reviewer's expertise.
Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers may evaluate:
- The importance and clarity of the research question
- Appropriateness of methodology
- Quality and sufficiency of evidence
- Analysis and reasoning
- Accuracy and adequacy of citations
- Originality
- Research integrity
- Ethical considerations
- Limitations
- Clarity of presentation
- Whether conclusions are supported by the evidence
Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers may recommend:
- Acceptance
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Additional review
- Rejection
Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial decision but do not automatically determine the outcome.
Editorial Decision
The assigned editor evaluates the manuscript, reviewer reports, author responses, revisions, ethical considerations, and other relevant information before making the editorial decision.
When reviewer recommendations materially disagree, the editor may seek an additional independent review.
Revisions
Authors may be invited to revise a manuscript in response to reviewer or editorial comments.
Authors should address substantive comments or explain why a recommended change was not adopted.
A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or sent to additional reviewers when further independent evaluation is necessary.
Supplementary Material
Supplementary material that materially supports the research conclusions may be provided to reviewers as part of the evaluation when appropriate.
Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat unpublished manuscripts and associated editorial communications as confidential.
Unpublished information obtained during peer review must not be used for personal, professional, academic, or financial advantage.
Artificial Intelligence and Peer Review
Reviewers and editors must not use generative artificial intelligence to create substantive peer review reports or editorial assessments.
Confidential unpublished manuscripts must not be submitted to public generative artificial intelligence services for analysis.
Limited editing or language assistance involving automated tools may be permitted when confidentiality is protected and the use is disclosed when appropriate.
Editorial decisions remain the responsibility of human editors.
Editor Authored Manuscripts
An editor or Editorial Board member who authors or coauthors a manuscript will not independently review that manuscript or make the sole final acceptance decision.
Another appropriate editor without a material conflict will oversee the process.
Non Peer Reviewed Content
Not all content published by Pyrrhic Press is peer reviewed research.
Editorials, commentary, interviews, professional perspectives, announcements, archival material, foundational works, and other identified content may receive editorial review without external peer review.
Such material will not knowingly be represented as independently peer reviewed research.
Special Issues
Special issues are subject to the same research integrity and peer review standards as regular journal issues.
The Editor-in-Chief retains responsibility for ensuring appropriate editorial oversight of special issues.
Guest editors, when used, must follow Pyrrhic Press conflict of interest, peer review, and research integrity policies.
Publication Dates
Published research articles should display the date of publication. Pyrrhic Press also seeks to display submission and acceptance dates for peer reviewed research.
Acceptance Is Not Guaranteed
Submission to Pyrrhic Press does not guarantee acceptance or publication. Completion of peer review does not guarantee acceptance.
Last updated: September 2026