Peer Review

Review Model

Ethnomathematics Journal applies a double-blind peer review process. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other to ensure an objective and unbiased evaluation.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editors to assess:

  • relevance to the journal’s scope,
  • originality and academic contribution,
  • compliance with author guidelines,
  • basic methodological and ethical standards.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.

Reviewer Assignment

Eligible manuscripts are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s topic.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • originality and novelty,
  • theoretical and methodological rigor,
  • clarity of presentation,
  • contribution to ethnomathematics and mathematics education research,
  • relevance to international readership.

Review Decision

Based on reviewers’ recommendations, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

Authors receiving revision decisions are required to submit a revised manuscript along with a response to reviewers’ comments.

Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the peer-review process within 4–8 weeks, although timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability.

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and Reviewers must not share or use unpublished materials for personal advantage.