How to Set Up a Peer-Reviewed Journal Step by Step

A peer-reviewed journal needs more than a website. It needs a defined editorial model, transparent policies, trained roles, reliable submission handling, and a publication workflow that editors, reviewers, and authors can actually follow.

Introduction

Starting a peer-reviewed journal is an important academic project, but it should not begin only with a domain name, logo, and homepage design. A successful journal needs a strong foundation before the first manuscript is accepted. The team must understand the subject area, the type of research it wants to publish, the review model it will follow, the editorial responsibilities of each member, and the technical system that will manage submissions. Open Journal Systems, commonly known as OJS, is a practical platform for this purpose because it supports online submission, editorial assignment, peer review, copyediting, production, issue management, and publication from one system.

However, OJS is only a tool. The quality of a journal depends on how clearly the editorial team defines its policies and how consistently it uses the workflow. A journal with unclear scope, weak review rules, incomplete author instructions, or inactive editors will struggle even if the website looks professional. On the other hand, a simple OJS journal with strong editorial planning can grow steadily, attract better submissions, and prepare itself for indexing, DOI registration, ISSN application, and long-term academic recognition.

Why this topic matters

• A clear scope prevents off-topic submissions and helps authors decide whether the journal fits their research work.
• Defined editor and reviewer roles keep manuscripts moving through the system instead of getting lost in email threads.
• Public editorial policies build trust with authors, readers, reviewers, indexing teams, and institutional partners.
• A tested OJS workflow reduces confusion during submission, peer review, revision, acceptance, and publication.

Step 1: Define the journal identity

The first step is to decide what the journal is and what it is not. This may sound simple, but many new journals skip this step and later receive submissions that do not match their academic purpose. Start with the journal title, subject area, aims and scope, target authors, target readers, and article types. Decide whether the journal will publish research articles, review articles, case studies, short communications, editorials, book reviews, conference papers, or special issue papers. Each article type should have a clear purpose and expected structure.

The scope should be specific enough to guide authors but broad enough to allow the journal to grow. For example, instead of saying that the journal accepts all engineering papers, the scope can mention selected disciplines, research methods, application areas, and interdisciplinary topics. This makes the journal easier to understand for authors, editors, reviewers, and indexing evaluators. A clear scope also helps the editorial board reject unsuitable submissions quickly and fairly.

Step 2: Build a responsible editorial team

A peer-reviewed journal cannot depend on one person for every task. Before launching, prepare the editorial structure. Common roles include Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, Section Editors, Reviewers, Copyeditors, Layout Editors, and Journal Manager. In OJS, these roles can be configured so each user sees the tools needed for their responsibility. The Editor-in-Chief may oversee editorial quality and final decisions, while Section Editors may manage submissions in specific subject areas. Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on academic quality, originality, methodology, references, ethical compliance, and relevance.

It is useful to create a simple internal role document that explains who handles new submissions, who assigns reviewers, who sends decisions, who checks revised manuscripts, who prepares galley files, and who publishes issues. This prevents delays and avoids confusion when more than one person is using the OJS dashboard.

Step 3: Prepare essential journal policies

Policies are not only formal text for the website. They are the rules that guide editorial decisions. A new journal should prepare author guidelines, peer-review policy, plagiarism policy, publication ethics statement, copyright and licensing policy, open access policy, conflict of interest policy, correction and retraction policy, archiving policy, fee policy, and privacy statement. These policies should be visible on the journal website and easy to find from the main navigation or footer.

Author guidelines should explain manuscript formatting, word limits, reference style, file requirements, figure and table rules, ethical approval requirements, and submission steps. The peer-review policy should mention whether the journal follows double-blind, single-blind, open, or editorial review. The fee policy should clearly state whether there are article processing charges, submission charges, publication charges, waiver rules, or no fees. Transparency is important because authors need to know the conditions before submitting their work.

Step 4: Configure the OJS journal settings

Once the editorial foundation is ready, configure the journal inside OJS. Start with the journal name, abbreviation, initials, publisher details, contact information, technical support contact, principal contact, ISSN details if available, language settings, and journal description. Add the journal logo, homepage image, favicon, and basic navigation links. Then configure sections such as Research Articles, Review Articles, Case Studies, and Editorials. Each section can have its own editors and policies if required.

Next, review the workflow settings. OJS allows journals to manage submission, review, copyediting, and production stages. Make sure submission components are enabled correctly, required metadata fields are clear, and email notifications are working. If the journal uses multiple languages, check that titles, abstracts, keywords, and navigation labels are properly configured. Also test the email configuration because editorial communication depends heavily on email notifications.

Step 5: Create submission guidelines and metadata rules

Good metadata improves discoverability. When authors submit manuscripts, they should enter accurate titles, abstracts, keywords, author names, affiliations, ORCID IDs where available, references, funding details, and contributor information. If metadata is incomplete or inconsistent, the journal may face problems later during DOI deposit, indexing application, citation tracking, and repository harvesting. OJS gives editors the ability to review and correct metadata before publication, but it is better to guide authors from the start.

Create clear instructions for authors on how to prepare files. For example, the main manuscript may need to be anonymized for blind review, while a title page may contain full author details. Figures and tables should be readable, references should follow the journal style, and ethical approval statements should be included where relevant. These small details reduce back-and-forth communication after submission.

Step 6: Set up the peer-review process

Peer review is the heart of a peer-reviewed journal. Decide how reviewers will be selected, how many reviewers are required per manuscript, how long reviewers have to complete a review, and what happens if reviews conflict. In OJS, editors can assign reviewers, set due dates, send reminders, upload review files, use review forms, and record recommendations. A structured review form is helpful because it asks reviewers to comment on originality, methodology, clarity, references, ethical issues, results, discussion, and overall recommendation.

The editorial team should also define decision categories such as accept, minor revision, major revision, resubmit for review, decline, or send to another section. Editors should not use peer review as a formality. Each decision should be based on reviewer feedback, editorial judgment, journal scope, and ethical requirements. Maintaining a clean record in OJS is useful for transparency and future evaluation.

Step 7: Plan copyediting and production

After acceptance, the manuscript should not be published immediately without final preparation. Copyediting checks grammar, clarity, consistency, references, author details, headings, tables, figure captions, funding statements, acknowledgements, and ethical declarations. Production converts the final accepted manuscript into publishable formats such as PDF, HTML, XML, or other galley files. The final article should match the journal style and include complete metadata.

Before publication, check the article title, author order, affiliations, DOI if used, abstract, keywords, references, issue assignment, page numbers or article ID, copyright statement, license, and PDF file. A final proofing step helps avoid mistakes that are difficult to correct after publication.

Step 8: Configure issues, archives, and publication frequency

A journal should decide how it will publish content. Some journals publish by volume and issue, such as Volume 1 Issue 1, while others use continuous publication where articles are published as soon as they are ready. Both models can work, but the journal should explain its publication frequency clearly. OJS supports issue creation, current issue display, archives, cover images, issue descriptions, and article ordering.

For new journals, it is better to start with a realistic frequency. Publishing quarterly may sound attractive, but the team must have enough quality submissions, reviewers, editors, and production support. A consistent publishing schedule is better than promising too much and failing to maintain it.

Step 9: Test the complete workflow before launch

Before inviting real authors, create a test submission and move it through every stage. Register a test author, submit a sample manuscript, assign an editor, assign reviewers, send a review request, submit reviewer comments, record an editorial decision, upload a revised file, accept the submission, move it to copyediting, create the production galley, assign it to an issue, and publish it. This test will reveal problems in email templates, role permissions, file upload settings, review forms, theme display, article metadata, and issue pages.

Testing is important because many problems appear only during real workflow use. A journal may look ready on the homepage but still have broken email, missing review settings, incomplete sections, wrong user permissions, or confusing author instructions. Fixing these problems before launch saves time and protects the journal’s reputation.

Step 10: Prepare for visibility and future indexing

Indexing should not be the first step, but the journal should prepare for it from the beginning. Keep the website transparent, publish complete policies, maintain editorial board details, show contact information, provide clear article metadata, use stable URLs, and avoid misleading indexing claims. Search engines, directories, repositories, and scholarly databases all depend on trust signals and metadata quality. A new journal should first build a reliable publishing record and then apply to indexes that match its subject and maturity.

Technical preparation also matters. Enable clean URLs where possible, maintain a sitemap, make sure article pages are indexable, use proper metadata, keep PDF links accessible, and avoid duplicate or broken pages. If the journal uses DOI, Crossref, ORCID, Google Scholar visibility, or repository export plugins, test each integration carefully instead of assuming it works automatically.

Practical checklist

• Define aims, scope, article types, review model, publication frequency, accepted languages, and target audience.
• Create author guidelines, peer-review policy, publication ethics, plagiarism policy, fee policy, copyright statement, and archiving policy.
• Configure OJS sections, roles, email templates, submission steps, review forms, metadata fields, and issue settings.
• Test the complete submission-to-publication workflow with a sample manuscript before opening the journal publicly.
• Check final metadata, PDF files, DOI settings, article pages, issue archives, contact details, and mobile display before launch.

Common mistakes to avoid

Many new journals focus heavily on visual design but ignore editorial readiness. A beautiful homepage cannot replace clear policies, active editors, reliable review, and complete metadata. Another common mistake is launching with too many sections, too many promises, or unrealistic publishing frequency. Start with a manageable structure and expand only when the team can support it.

Journals should also avoid copying policies from other websites without adapting them. Policies must match the real workflow of the journal. If the website says the journal follows double-blind review, the submission files and reviewer process should actually support double-blind review. If the website says there are no publication fees, the author guidelines and email templates should not suggest hidden charges. Consistency builds trust.

GetOJS recommendation

Start small but complete. A compact journal with strong policies, working email, trained roles, and a tested OJS workflow is better than a visually rich website with unclear editorial rules. GetOJS recommends preparing the editorial structure first, then configuring OJS around that structure. Once the workflow is stable, the journal can improve its theme, add DOI support, strengthen metadata, prepare for indexing, and train the team for long-term publishing success.