Contemporary Review of Political Thought is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, transparent, and academically independent peer-review process. Peer review is central to the journal’s editorial standards and is used to assess the originality, scholarly quality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

《当代政治思想评论》坚持严谨、公正、透明且具有学术独立性的同行评审流程。同行评审是本刊编辑标准的重要组成部分，用于评估来稿的原创性、学术质量、方法可靠性、伦理合规性以及与本刊范围的契合度。

Review Model｜评审模式

The journal normally applies a double-blind peer-review process for Original Research Articles, Theoretical Essays, Review Articles, Policy and Institutional Analysis articles, and Special Issue Articles. In a double-blind review, the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to each other during the review process.

本刊通常对原创研究论文、理论论文、综述论文、政策与制度分析文章以及专题论文采用双盲同行评审。在双盲评审过程中，作者与审稿人的身份在评审期间互不公开。

Forum Contributions, Book Reviews, invited essays, and other shorter article types may be evaluated through editorial review, peer review, or a combined review process depending on the nature, length, and scholarly content of the submission.

论坛文章、书评、约稿文章及其他较短类型稿件，可根据稿件性质、篇幅与学术内容采用编辑评审、同行评审或二者结合的评审方式。

Initial Editorial Screening｜编辑初审

All submissions are first reviewed by the editorial office to determine whether they meet the journal’s basic requirements. Initial screening considers the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, originality, academic quality, language clarity, formatting, ethical compliance, and completeness of submission materials.

所有来稿首先由编辑部进行初审，以判断其是否符合本刊基本要求。初审内容包括稿件与本刊宗旨和范围的契合度、原创性、学术质量、语言清晰度、格式规范、伦理合规性以及投稿材料完整性。

Manuscripts may be declined without external review if they fall outside the journal’s scope, fail to meet basic academic standards, show serious ethical concerns, lack originality, or do not comply with the journal’s submission requirements.

如稿件不符合本刊范围、未达到基本学术标准、存在严重伦理问题、原创性不足，或未遵守本刊投稿要求，编辑部可在不送外审的情况下作出退稿决定。

Reviewer Selection｜审稿人选择

Reviewers are selected according to their academic expertise, research background, methodological competence, language ability, and relevance to the manuscript’s subject area. The editorial office seeks reviewers who can provide informed, constructive, and independent evaluations.

审稿人将依据其学术专长、研究背景、方法能力、语言能力以及与稿件主题的相关性进行选择。编辑部将尽量邀请能够提供专业、建设性和独立评价的审稿人。

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest before accepting a review assignment. If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer should decline the invitation or notify the editorial office immediately.

审稿人在接受评审邀请前，应披露任何实际或潜在的利益冲突。如存在利益冲突，审稿人应拒绝评审邀请，或立即告知编辑部。

Review Criteria｜评审标准

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts according to the following criteria:

审稿人应根据以下标准评估稿件：

• Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope｜是否符合本刊宗旨与范围
• Originality and scholarly contribution｜原创性与学术贡献
• Clarity of research question or theoretical problem｜研究问题或理论问题是否清晰
• Strength and coherence of argumentation｜论证力度与逻辑连贯性
• Appropriateness of methodology or analytical approach｜研究方法或分析路径是否适切
• Engagement with relevant literature｜是否充分回应相关文献
• Conceptual precision and analytical depth｜概念准确性与分析深度
• Use of evidence, sources, or textual materials｜证据、资料或文本材料使用是否恰当
• Language clarity and academic style｜语言清晰度与学术表达
• Compliance with ethical and publication standards｜是否符合伦理与出版规范

Reviewer Recommendations｜审稿建议

Reviewers may recommend one of the following outcomes:

审稿人可提出以下评审建议之一：

• Accept｜接受
• Minor Revision｜小修
• Major Revision｜大修
• Revise and Resubmit｜修改后重投
• Reject｜拒稿

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the editorial office or responsible editor after considering reviewer comments, editorial assessment, journal scope, ethical compliance, and publication standards.

审稿建议具有参考性质。最终编辑决定由编辑部或负责编辑在综合审稿意见、编辑评估、本刊范围、伦理合规性与出版标准后作出。

Editorial Decisions｜编辑决定

After peer review, the editorial office may issue one of the following decisions:

同行评审结束后，编辑部可作出以下决定：

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without substantial revision.
  接受：稿件无需实质性修改即可录用。
• Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited revisions before final acceptance.
  小修：稿件需要进行有限修改后方可最终录用。
• Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revision and may be reassessed after resubmission.
  大修：稿件需要进行实质性修改，修改后可能再次评估。
• Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript is not accepted in its current form but may be resubmitted as a substantially revised manuscript.
  修改后重投：稿件当前形式不予录用，但作者可在实质性修改后重新提交。
• Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.
  拒稿：稿件不适合在本刊发表。

Revision Process｜修改流程

When revision is requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a response letter. The response letter should explain how each editorial and reviewer comment has been addressed, and where changes have been made in the manuscript.

如编辑部要求修改，作者应提交修改稿及修改说明。修改说明应逐项回应编辑与审稿人的意见，并说明稿件中相应修改的位置。

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers, assessed by new reviewers, or evaluated by the editorial office, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions.

修改稿可根据修改幅度与稿件性质送原审稿人复审、邀请新审稿人评审，或由编辑部进行评估。

Review Timeline｜评审周期

The journal seeks to conduct peer review and editorial decision-making in a timely and responsible manner. The actual duration of review may vary depending on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, disciplinary field, revision rounds, and editorial workload.

本刊力求以及时、负责的方式完成同行评审与编辑决定。实际评审周期可能因稿件复杂程度、审稿人可用性、学科领域、修改轮次与编辑工作量而有所不同。

The expected review and publication timeline is as follows:

本刊预计评审与出版流程如下：

• Initial Editorial Screening: normally within 1–2 weeks after submission｜编辑初审：通常在投稿后 1–2 周内完成
• External Peer Review: normally 4–8 weeks｜外部同行评审：通常为 4–8 周
• Author Revision: normally 2–6 weeks, depending on the extent of revision required｜作者修改：通常为 2–6 周，具体取决于修改幅度
• Final Editorial Decision: normally within 1–3 weeks after receipt of the revised manuscript｜最终编辑决定：通常在收到修改稿后 1–3 周内作出
• Production and Proofing: normally 2–4 weeks after acceptance and completion of required publication procedures｜制作与校对：通常在录用并完成必要出版手续后 2–4 周内进行

The average time from submission to publication is normally estimated at 12–20 weeks, depending on the number of review rounds, the speed of author revision, proof correction, and completion of publication requirements.

从投稿到正式出版的平均周期通常预计为 12–20 周，具体取决于评审轮次、作者修改速度、校样确认以及出版手续完成情况。

These timelines are provided as general guidance and do not constitute a guarantee of publication or a fixed deadline for editorial decisions.

上述周期为一般性参考，并不构成出版保证或固定编辑决定期限。

Authors will be informed of major changes in review status through the journal’s online submission system or by editorial communication where appropriate.

如评审状态发生重要变化，作者将通过本刊在线投稿后台或编辑部沟通获得相应通知。

Confidentiality｜保密原则

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose, share, copy, use, or discuss unpublished manuscripts except for purposes directly related to editorial evaluation and peer review.

所有处于评审过程中的稿件均被视为保密文件。编辑、审稿人及编辑工作人员不得披露、分享、复制、使用或讨论未发表稿件，除非该行为与编辑评估和同行评审直接相关。

Reviewers must not use unpublished materials, ideas, arguments, data, or interpretations obtained through peer review for personal advantage or for the advantage of others.

审稿人不得将通过同行评审获得的未发表材料、观点、论证、数据或阐释用于个人利益或他人利益。

Conflicts of Interest｜利益冲突

Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that may affect, or appear to affect, their impartiality. Conflicts may include financial, institutional, personal, academic, competitive, supervisory, collaborative, or professional relationships with the author or the manuscript’s subject matter.

编辑与审稿人必须披露任何可能影响或被认为影响其公正性的利益冲突。利益冲突可能包括与作者或稿件主题相关的财务、机构、个人、学术、竞争、指导、合作或职业关系。

If a conflict of interest is identified, the editorial office may assign another editor or reviewer to ensure an impartial evaluation.

如发现利益冲突，编辑部可另行指定编辑或审稿人，以确保评审过程的公正性。

Research Integrity During Review｜评审中的研究诚信

If editors or reviewers identify possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, manipulated evidence, inappropriate citation practices, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of research misconduct, the editorial office will investigate the concern according to the journal’s publication ethics policy.

如编辑或审稿人发现可能存在抄袭、重复发表、数据伪造、证据篡改、不当引用、未披露利益冲突或其他形式的学术不端，编辑部将依据本刊出版伦理政策进行核查。

Manuscripts may be rejected or returned to authors if serious ethical concerns are confirmed.

如严重伦理问题被确认，稿件可能被退稿或退回作者处理。

Appeals and Complaints｜申诉与投诉

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that a significant procedural error, misunderstanding, or conflict of interest affected the decision. Appeals must provide clear reasons and supporting evidence.

如作者认为编辑决定受到重大程序错误、误解或利益冲突影响，可提出申诉。申诉应提供清楚理由与支持性证据。

Appeals are reviewed by the editorial office. Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

申诉由编辑部进行审查。提出申诉并不意味着原编辑决定必然被改变。

Reviewer Ethics｜审稿伦理

Reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, timely, and respectful evaluations. Reviews should focus on the scholarly content of the manuscript and should not include personal criticism, discriminatory language, defamatory remarks, or irrelevant commentary.

审稿人应提供公正、建设性、及时且尊重性的评审意见。评审意见应聚焦稿件学术内容，不应包含人身批评、歧视性语言、诽谤性表述或无关评论。

Reviewers should decline a review invitation if they lack sufficient expertise, cannot complete the review within a reasonable timeframe, or have a conflict of interest.

如审稿人缺乏相应专业能力、无法在合理时间内完成评审，或存在利益冲突，应拒绝评审邀请。

Editorial Independence｜编辑独立性

Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, relevance to the journal’s scope, originality, ethical compliance, and review results. Decisions are not influenced by the author’s nationality, institutional affiliation, political views, religion, gender, ethnicity, seniority, or ability to pay publication fees.

编辑决定依据稿件学术价值、与本刊范围的契合度、原创性、伦理合规性及评审结果作出，不受作者国籍、机构身份、政治观点、宗教、性别、族裔、资历或支付出版费用能力影响。

Payment of an Article Processing Charge does not influence peer review, acceptance decisions, or publication priority.

文章处理费的支付不影响同行评审、录用决定或出版优先顺序。

Record Keeping and Transparency｜记录保存与透明性

The journal maintains editorial and review records for submitted manuscripts, including editorial decisions, reviewer reports, author responses, revision history, and publication decisions where applicable. These records are used for editorial accountability, quality control, and publication integrity.

本刊对来稿的编辑与评审过程保留相应记录，包括编辑决定、审稿意见、作者回应、修改记录以及出版决定等信息。相关记录用于编辑责任追踪、质量控制与出版诚信管理。

The journal does not publicly disclose confidential reviewer reports, reviewer identities, or internal editorial discussions unless required by law, ethical investigation, or formal publication integrity procedures.

除法律要求、伦理调查或正式出版诚信程序需要外，本刊不公开保密审稿意见、审稿人身份或内部编辑讨论内容。

Final Responsibility｜最终责任

The editorial office is responsible for the final decision on all submissions. The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts that fail to meet its academic, ethical, editorial, or technical requirements at any stage of the review and publication process.

编辑部对所有来稿的最终决定负责。本刊保留在评审与出版流程任何阶段拒绝不符合学术、伦理、编辑或技术要求稿件的权利。