Peer Review Process

Scientific Collaborative Online Publishing Universal Academy (SCOPUA) applies a rigorous single-blind peer-review process to all scholarly books before publication. Reviewers remain anonymous, while author and editor identities are disclosed to reviewers. The process follows the COPE Code of Conduct, DOAB peer-review criteria, and Scopus CSAB guidelines for academic books.

Peer Review of Edited Volumes

  1. Two-Stage Review Structure

Edited volumes are subject to a two-stage peer-review process to ensure both conceptual coherence and chapter-level academic quality.

  1. Stage One: Proposal and Volume-Level Review

2.1 Editorial Screening

The complete book proposal, including rationale, structure, abstracts, and editor credentials, is assessed for:

  • Scholarly relevance and originality
  • Thematic coherence
  • Academic merit of the proposed contributors
  • Editorial competence and feasibility

2.2 External Review of the Volume Concept

The proposal is reviewed by at least two independent external reviewers, who evaluate:

  • The intellectual coherence of the volume
  • Contribution to the field
  • Editorial strategy and integration
  1. Stage Two: Chapter-Level Peer Review

Each chapter submitted to the edited volume undergoes individual peer review, conducted as follows:

  • Each chapter is reviewed by at least one independent external reviewer
  • Reviewers assess chapters independently of the volume editors
  • Volume editors do not serve as sole reviewers of chapters
  1. Editorial Oversight and Final Approval

Volume editors coordinate revisions, but final acceptance decisions remain with the Publisher or Editorial Board, ensuring independence and compliance with COPE principles. So, where necessary, revised chapters may be re-reviewed.

Peer Review of Scholarly Monographs

  1. Scope and Eligibility

All research monographs, including authored scholarly books and research-based publications, are subject to full peer review before acceptance.

  1. Initial Editorial Assessment

Manuscripts failing to meet baseline scholarly or ethical standards may be desk-rejected. Upon submission, the monograph undergoes an editorial screening to evaluate:

  • Originality and scholarly contribution
  • Conceptual coherence and research depth
  • Ethical compliance
  1. External Peer Review

Eligible monographs are reviewed by at least two independent external experts with recognized subject-matter expertise. Reviewers are selected based on::

  • Independence from the author(s) and affiliated institutions
  • Declared absence of conflicts of interest
  1. Editorial Decision and Revision

The Editor makes a decision based on reviewer reports and communicates anonymized feedback to the author. Revised manuscripts may be re-reviewed where substantial changes are required. Only monographs that successfully complete peer review are approved for publication and labeled as peer-reviewed scholarly books, in compliance with DOAB and Scopus requirements.

Thesis Publication as a Book

In accordance with the Scientific Collaborative Online Publishing Universal Academy (SCOPUA)’s peer-review policy, the publication of Master’s and PhD thesis as scholarly books is permitted only under clearly defined conditions. The Publisher does not consider an institutional thesis, in its original or lightly edited form, to constitute a scholarly book. To be eligible for publication, a thesis must be substantially revised and formally transformed into a research monograph, with thesis-specific elements removed and the argument, structure, and scholarly framing adapted for a wider academic readership. Following submission, the revised manuscript undergoes the Publisher’s standard single-blind peer-review process, independent of the university examination process. At least two external reviewers, who have no conflict of interest and are not connected to the original thesis supervision, are appointed to assess the work’s originality, methodological rigor, scholarly contribution, and ethical compliance. Editorial decisions are based on reviewer reports and are taken independently, in accordance with COPE principles of fairness, confidentiality, and transparency. The Publisher ensures that all thesis-based books are peer reviewed prior to publication, assigned an ISBN, and clearly labeled as peer-reviewed scholarly works. A transparent disclosure is included in the book stating that it is a revised and peer-reviewed version of an academic thesis.

Ethical Standards and Transparency

  • All reviewers must declare conflicts of interest
  • Reviewer identities remain confidential
  • Suspected misconduct is handled according to COPE flowcharts
  • Peer review is completed before publication