Scope
Reality Herald as a whole is not peer-reviewed. Most articles undergo editorial review only. Formal peer review applies only when an editor places a manuscript into the peer-review track and the manuscript completes the process described below. Only such work may carry the Peer Reviewed label.
Purpose of peer review
Formal peer review provides an additional level of scholarly scrutiny for work whose claims, methods, evidence, or engagement with scholarship warrant evaluation by qualified readers with relevant subject knowledge. Peer review supplements editorial judgment rather than replacing it.
Reviewer selection
Reality Herald will ordinarily seek two reviewers with knowledge relevant to the manuscript. Reviewers may come from academic, professional, research, legal, historical, theological, scientific, or other backgrounds appropriate to the subject. The editor should avoid selecting reviewers whose known conflicts of interest could reasonably compromise the review.
Independence of review
Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript’s reasoning, evidence, source use, originality, engagement with relevant scholarship, and contribution without instruction to reach a preferred substantive conclusion. Agreement with the author’s position is not a condition for a favorable review, and disagreement alone does not justify rejection.
Review criteria
Reviewers should consider, as relevant to the manuscript:
- whether the central thesis or research question is clearly stated;
- whether the argument follows from the evidence and reasoning offered;
- whether significant factual claims receive adequate support;
- whether sources are appropriate, accurately represented, and sufficiently complete;
- whether contrary evidence and serious opposing arguments receive fair treatment;
- whether the work contributes something sufficiently original or useful to justify publication;
- whether methods, calculations, translations, quotations, or technical claims require correction or clarification;
- whether conclusions extend beyond what the evidence supports.
Reviewer recommendations
A reviewer may recommend Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Decline. Recommendations should explain the principal reasons for the judgment and identify any changes the reviewer considers necessary.
Editorial decision
The editor makes the final publication decision after considering the manuscript, reviewer reports, author responses, and any additional verification the editor considers necessary. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not function as automatic votes.
Revisions and author response
When revisions are requested, the author should return a revised manuscript and, when requested, a response explaining how the principal reviewer comments were addressed. A substantially revised manuscript may return to one or both reviewers before a final decision.
Conflicts of interest
Reviewers should disclose financial, organizational, professional, collaborative, supervisory, personal, or adversarial relationships that could reasonably affect their judgment. The editor may replace a reviewer when a conflict raises a substantial concern about independence.
Confidentiality
Unpublished manuscripts and reviewer reports should receive appropriate editorial confidentiality. Reviewers should not distribute, publish, or use unpublished material from a manuscript for their own work without permission. Reality Herald may preserve editorial records necessary to document the review process.
Reviewer identity
Reality Herald may use anonymous, single-anonymous, double-anonymous, or disclosed review depending on the manuscript and available reviewers. The editor should tell authors which arrangement applies when that information matters to the review process.
Peer Reviewed label
The Peer Reviewed label may appear only after the manuscript completes formal peer review and receives final editorial acceptance. The label indicates completion of this process; it does not imply unanimity among reviewers or guarantee that no error remains.
Relation to editorial standards
Peer-reviewed work remains subject to all other Reality Herald editorial standards, including requirements concerning accuracy, sourcing, attribution, conflicts of interest, AI-assisted work, and corrections. See the Editorial Standards.