Peer Review Policy
Guidelines for Reviewers
The Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology – Compaso values the role that peer reviewers play in ensuring the academic quality, ethical integrity, and scholarly relevance of published work. Compaso is especially committed to supporting and encouraging early-career researchers. In this spirit, reviewers are asked to approach their task not only as gatekeepers of quality, but also as mentors contributing to the broader academic community.
All manuscripts submitted to Compaso are first assessed by the editorial team to determine whether they align with the journal’s aims, thematic focus, and academic standards. Submissions deemed suitable for further consideration are then evaluated through a double-anonymous peer review process, in which both the authors’ and the reviewers’ identities remain confidential. Each manuscript is reviewed by two independent experts, and their feedback plays a key role in informing editorial decisions.
Reviewers are asked to evaluate each submission across several key dimensions:
- Originality and contribution: The extent to which the manuscript offers new insights, approaches, or empirical data, and how it contributes to current scholarly debates.
- Clarity and coherence: The structure of the article, the logical development of arguments, and the clarity with which research questions, methods, and conclusions are presented.
- Theoretical and methodological rigor: The relevance and consistency of theoretical frameworks, the soundness and transparency of the methodology, and the adequacy of evidence supporting the claims.
- Relevance and significance: The importance of the topic in relation to the journal’s scope and the quality of engagement with relevant literature.
- Quality of writing and presentation: The clarity and accuracy of the writing, the use of appropriate academic style, and the adherence to the American Sociological Association (ASA) referencing style.
In alignment with the journal’s mission to support early-career scholars, reviewers are expected to offer detailed, constructive, and respectful feedback. Even when a manuscript does not meet the criteria for publication, reviewers should provide comments that help the author understand the strengths and weaknesses of their submission. Feedback should go beyond general remarks and identify specific areas for improvement, such as the refinement of arguments, clarification of theoretical perspectives, enhancement of methodological transparency, or strengthening of literature engagement.
Reviewers are also encouraged to highlight the manuscript’s positive aspects—whether it be originality, innovation, or relevance—so that authors receive balanced and supportive guidance. Particular care should be taken when reviewing submissions from early-career researchers, whose work may benefit substantially from thoughtful and encouraging critique. All comments should be framed in a collegial tone, with the aim of fostering intellectual development, regardless of the final recommendation.
To ensure consistency in the peer review process, reviewers are asked to complete the official Review Form. If reviewers encounter any difficulties accessing the form or require clarification on any aspect of the process, they are encouraged to contact the editorial team directly.
When an author submits a revised manuscript, they are required to include a detailed Response Letter explaining how they have addressed the reviewers’ suggestions. A response template is available to facilitate this process.
The editorial team of Compaso sincerely thanks its reviewers for their time, insight, and commitment. The journal relies on their thoughtful and constructive feedback to maintain the quality, integrity, and relevance of its published work.
