Review Process

All submissions undergo an initial editorial screening by the relevant editors and, where appropriate, by members of the editorial board for fit with the journal’s aims and scope, subject matter, originality, ethical compliance, and adherence to author guidelines. Zemin operates a double-blind, external peer-review model. Following screening, the Editor-in-Chief oversees the process and assigns an independent handling editor (who is free of conflicts of interest) to manage the file. The handling editor invites at least two external reviewers with relevant expertise and no conflicts of interest. Reviewers and editors must declare any potential conflicts; conflicted individuals are recused. Reviews are assessed against common scholarly criteria, including originality, methodological rigor, contribution to the field, clarity of presentation, and ethics compliance. Where the two reports diverge (e.g., one positive and one negative), the handling editor may commission a third review or reach a decision in consultation with the editorial board. After the initial screening, the first round of peer review typically takes about two months (usually 1 to 4 months), and may be extended if a third review is required. Final decisions —Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject— are based on the external reports and editorial judgment. Submissions authored by members of the editorial board are subject to additional safeguards (independent handling and external review) as set out in our Ethical Principles and Publication Policy. Book reviews, research notes, and documents published in Zemin do not undergo external peer review; however, no item is published without editorial assessment by the relevant field editors and, where needed, the editorial board.