Reviewer Guidelines

The journal relies on the expertise of its editorial board and reviewers to maintain the highest standards of scholarly excellence. Reviewers will be required to conduct thorough and objective peer reviews of submitted manuscripts.

Responsibilities of a reviewer

● Assess Suitability: Before accepting an invitation, consider:
    ○ Does the article match your area of expertise?
    ○ Do you have any potential conflicts of interest?
    ○ Do you have sufficient time to complete a thorough and timely review?
    ○ Respond to the invitation as soon as possible, even if it is to decline.

● Objectivity and Impartiality: Conduct reviews objectively and impartially, free from personal bias,
    conflicts of interest, or undue influence.

● Confidentiality: Maintain the strictest confidentiality regarding all information related to the manuscript
    under review.


Review Considerations for an empirical article

     ● Importance and clarity of the research question and the rationale.
     ● The manuscript’s novelty and contribution to a specific field of research.
     ● Assessment of the study’s methodological considerations to draw attention to any major
         methodological flaws, such as unsound methodology, discredited methods, missing influential
        processes, or conclusions contradicting the evidence.
     ● Authors' interpretation of the results and the conclusions drawn. Including the robustness and
        appropriateness of the statistical methods, including the adequacy of controls and sampling
        mechanisms (if applicable).
     ● Overall writing style, organisation, clarity, and effectiveness of figures and tables.

Review Considerations for a review article or other article types

     ● The importance and relevance of the topic.
     ● The author's representation of the most relevant recent advances in the field, ensuring
        comprehensive coverage of both historical and contemporary literature.
     ● Author's interpretation of the existing research and the conclusions drawn from the review.
     ● Overall writing style, organisation, clarity, and effectiveness of figures and tables.

Ethical Considerations

     ● Ensure Ethical Compliance: Verify that research involving human or animal subjects has been
        conducted ethically and complies with all relevant guidelines and regulations.
     ● Check for Ethical Approvals: Ensure that the manuscript includes documentation of ethical approval
        from the appropriate institutions (e.g. IRB).

Final Decision
While the editor ultimately decides whether to accept or reject the manuscript, you can provide one of the following recommendations along with clear justification for your decision:
● Accept submissions
● Revisions required
● Resubmit for review
● Decline submission 
● See Comments

Book Review Submission Guidelines for the Reviewers

Scope of the Book Review

The International Journal of Traditional Healing and Critical Mental Health invites book reviewers with expertise in traditional healing, indigenous knowledge systems, critical mental health, psychotherapy, decolonial studies, cultural psychiatry, and related areas.

The journal will choose a book and invite reviewers for the same. Unsolicited full reviews should not be submitted unless invited or approved in advance. Any review copy provided is for review purposes only. It should not be shared, circulated, or used for other purposes without permission.

Potential Book Reviewers

We welcome book reviews from: Eminent professors and Emeritus professors, Practitioners in various fields of healing and critical mental health, Advanced doctoral researchers or early-career academicians.

Format (Belcher, n.d.)

  • Word Limit is 2500 words
  • Title including complete bibliographic citation for the work (i.e., title in full, author, place, publisher, date of publication, edition statement, pages, special features [maps, color plates, etc.], price, and ISBN.
  • Identifying the thesis, and whether the author achieves the stated purpose of the book.
  • Critical analysis of the main arguments
  • The book’s strengths.
  • The book’s weaknesses.
  • Book’s contribution to the field or discipline
  • Theoretical and Practical Applications of the book

Conflict of interest and disclosure

Reviewers must disclose any possible conflict of interest, including:

  • Prior collaboration with the author.
  • Shared institutional affiliations.
  • Recent joint projects.
  • Financial or publishing relationships.
  • Close personal or professional relationships that may affect impartiality.

A short disclosure statement should appear at the end of the review.

Copyright and permissions

The review becomes part of the journal’s published content upon acceptance, subject to the journal’s editorial and copyright policy. Reviewers should not reproduce large portions of the book. Short quotations may be used sparingly and only where necessary.

Editorial process

  1. The editor identifies a book and calls for a suitable reviewer.
  2. The reviewer receives the invitation and review copy.
  3. The reviewer accepts and confirms the deadline.
  4. The review is submitted for editorial checking.
  5. Minor edits may be made for style, length, or clarity.
  6. The final version is published.

Submission instructions

Reviews should be submitted to https://journals.christuniversity.in/index.php/ijthcmh/about

Please include the following information:

  • Reviewer name.
  • Affliation.
  • Email address.
  • Disclosure statement.

Editorial Reviewers Guidelines

Please use the following questions to guide your editorial review

- Accuracy: Does the review accurately represent the book’s claims?

- Analysis: Does it critically engage with evidence, methods, and theory?

- Contextualization: Does it situate the book within relevant debates (including IKS and critical mental
  health scholarship)?

- Usefulness: Will the review help readers decide whether to read the book or how to use it?

- Ethics: Has the reviewer declared conflicts or positionality appropriately?