Evaluation Criteria and Editorial Decision

All articles submitted to New Trends in Qualitative Research (NTQR) are subject to a scientific peer-review process. Each submitted manuscript is evaluated by at least two external reviewers (independent from the editorial board and the publisher Ludomedia), under a double-blind peer review process. In cases of divergent evaluations, or whenever deemed necessary by the editor, a third reviewer may be appointed to ensure a well-founded and balanced editorial decision. The editorial evaluation focuses on the article’s contribution to the advancement of methodological knowledge in qualitative research, in accordance with the journal’s scope, mission, and editorial principles.

The criteria outlined below guide article preparation, reviewers’ assessments, and editorial decisions, and should be interpreted in a manner appropriate to the type of article submitted.

 

1. Alignment with the journal’s scope

  • The article places qualitative methodology as the central object of analysis.
  • The focus goes beyond the description of procedures, integrating critical analysis and substantive methodological reflection.
  • The methodological discussion is explicit, coherent, and aligned with NTQR’s editorial scope.

2. Quality of the methodological contribution

  • The article introduces, develops, or problematises relevant methodological concepts, models, practices, or learning processes.
  • It critically analyses, compares, or questions existing qualitative approaches, methods, or techniques.
  • It demonstrates relevant methodological contributions, dilemmas, limitations, or innovations that are transferable to qualitative researchers.

3. Theoretical-methodological framework

  • The article is appropriately situated within the relevant methodological literature.
  • It demonstrates critical knowledge of the main debates, traditions, and approaches in qualitative research.
  • It uses pertinent, up-to-date methodological sources that are clearly articulated with the focus of the contribution.

4. Methodological rigour and reflexivity

  • Methodological choices are clearly justified and coherent with the objectives of the article.
  • The limitations, challenges, and methodological implications of the contribution are critically discussed.
  • The article demonstrates reflexivity appropriate to the type of text, considering:
    • the role of the researcher;
    • the theoretical, epistemological, and methodological choices adopted;
    • the author’s positioning in relation to the research process.

5. Clarity, structure, and argumentation

  • The text presents a clear, coherent, and well-structured argumentation.
  • There is an explicit distinction between description and critical analysis.
  • The article contributes to the advancement of methodological thinking in qualitative research.

6. Relevance to the scientific community

  • The contribution is relevant to researchers who use, study, or teach qualitative methodologies.
  • It demonstrates potential to influence methodological practices, training processes, or future research.
  • It shows scientific usefulness and added value for the field of qualitative research.