Publication Process

All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Exercise Physiology and Human Performance (JOSPHE) undergo a rigorous editorial and peer-review process to ensure scientific quality, originality, ethical integrity, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.

Submitted manuscripts must:

Comply with the journal's Author Guidelines.
Meet the journal's ethical requirements.
Include all required declarations (e.g., conflict of interest, funding information, ethics approval where applicable, and author contributions).

Incomplete submissions may be returned to the authors before editorial evaluation.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

The Editorial Office conducts an initial screening to evaluate:

Relevance to the journal's aims and scope
Compliance with submission requirements
Overall manuscript quality
Ethical considerations
Language clarity
Suitability for peer review

The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor may reject manuscripts without external review if they are outside the journal's scope or fail to meet the journal's minimum scientific or ethical standards.

3. Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo similarity screening using plagiarism detection software.

Manuscripts with unacceptable levels of textual similarity or evidence of plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other forms of publication misconduct will be rejected or returned to the authors for clarification in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics policy.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers under a double-blind peer-review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

Originality and novelty
Scientific merit
Methodological rigor
Ethical compliance
Clarity and organization
Validity of results
Quality of discussion and conclusions
Relevance to the journal's aims and scope

When necessary, additional reviewers may be invited.

5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor will make one of the following decisions:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

Editorial decisions consider reviewers' comments, scientific quality, ethical compliance, and the journal's editorial standards.

Authors receiving revision requests should submit:

A revised manuscript; and
A point-by-point response addressing each reviewer comment.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified timeframe may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

6. Final Acceptance

Once all reviewer comments have been satisfactorily addressed and the manuscript fulfills the journal's editorial and ethical requirements, the Editor-in-Chief issues the final acceptance decision.

Acceptance is based solely on scientific merit, originality, methodological quality, and relevance to the journal.

7. Copyediting and Production

Accepted manuscripts undergo professional editorial processing, including:

Copyediting
Language editing (when necessary)
Reference checking
Formatting
Typesetting
Proofreading

The purpose of this stage is to ensure accuracy, consistency, readability, and compliance with the journal's publication standards.

8. Author Proof Approval

The corresponding author receives the page proofs for final review before publication.

Only minor corrections, such as typographical or formatting errors, are permitted at this stage. Substantial changes to the scientific content are generally not accepted after final acceptance.

9. Online Publication

After author approval, the final version of the article is published online and becomes immediately and freely accessible through the journal's website under the journal's Open Access policy.

Each published article receives complete bibliographic information and becomes part of the permanent scholarly record.