Peer Review Process

Enhanced Language Learning Innovation and Technology (ELLIT) is committed to ensuring the quality, integrity, and academic rigor of all published articles through a fair and transparent double-blind peer review process.

Review Model

ELLIT applies a double-blind peer review, in which:

  • Authors do not know the identity of reviewers

  • Reviewers do not know the identity of authors

This model is intended to ensure objectivity, impartiality, and scholarly fairness.

Review Stages

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    Upon submission, the manuscript is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Section Editor to assess:

    • Relevance to the journal’s scope

    • Originality and scholarly contribution

    • Compliance with author guidelines

    • Language quality and basic methodological soundness

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

  2. Plagiarism and Ethical Check
    All manuscripts passing initial screening are checked using plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts that exceed the journal’s similarity threshold or violate ethical standards will be rejected or returned for revision.

  3. Reviewer Assignment
    Manuscripts that pass editorial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s topic. Reviewers are selected based on:

    • Subject-matter expertise

    • Research experience

    • Absence of conflicts of interest

  4. Peer Review Evaluation
    Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

    • Originality and relevance

    • Theoretical grounding

    • Methodological rigor

    • Data analysis and interpretation

    • Clarity of presentation

    • Contribution to innovation and technology-enhanced language learning

    Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations.

  5. Editorial Decision
    Based on reviewers’ reports, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

    • Accept

    • Accept with minor revisions

    • Revise and resubmit (major revisions)

    • Reject

    The editorial decision, along with anonymized reviewer comments, is communicated to the corresponding author.

  6. Revision and Re-Review
    Authors must submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a detailed response to reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly in cases of major revision.

  7. Final Decision
    The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding publication based on:

    • Reviewer recommendations

    • Quality of revisions

    • Compliance with journal standards

Review Timeline

ELLIT strives to provide a timely review process:

  • Initial screening: within 1–2 weeks

  • Peer review: approximately 4–6 weeks

  • Final decision: dependent on revision quality and responsiveness

Delays, if any, will be communicated to the author.

Reviewer Ethics and Confidentiality

  • Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents.

  • Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Unpublished material disclosed in a manuscript may not be used for personal advantage.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of the publisher or sponsoring institutions and are based solely on academic merit, relevance, and ethical considerations.

Post-Publication Review

ELLIT welcomes post-publication scholarly discussion. Substantive concerns regarding published articles will be handled in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Correction and Retraction Policies.