Journal of Media Studies

Focus and Scope

JMS seeks to reflect a variety of intellectual traditions in the communication field to promote debate and dialogue. We encourage empirical, theoretical and methodological research papers contributing to the advancement of communication sciences as an interdisciplinary field. Original papers based on systematic reviews, meta-analysis and synthesis from diverse sources are welcomed. To advance indigenizing communication knowledge, JMS accepts papers in Urdu language with an abstract in English.

We suggest the following broad areas of research:

• Development & communication
• Gender & communication
• International communication
• Media, religion & identity
• Media, culture and society
• Digital Humanities
• War, conflict and communication
• Media, democracy and peace studies
• Media and Political Economy 

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

This journal uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. 

Comprehensive Peer Review Process

After receiving a manuscript (online submission only) author will receive an automated acknowledgement email.

Each submission is checked for plagiarism (criteria > 16% further consult author's guidelines) and relevance to the journal's subject, aim, and scope. Manuscript preview is as follows:

• Each editorial board member will preview the manuscript to ensure the quality of the article and research and decide whether the manuscript is suitable for the publication in JMS or not.
• If the editorial board deems manuscript suitable for the publication then it is will be sent to the second blind-review phase.
• If the editorial board considered the article to be suitable for JMS but requires minor changes before sending it for the second phase of blind review, the author will be asked to make the changes with a deadline to incorporate revisions as suggested by the editorial board. Once the suggestions are incorporated in the article, it will be sent for second phase of blind-review.

If the submitted manuscript fails to comply with editorial criteria of JMS it will result in the following possibilities:

1.     The manuscript will be rejected without any blind-review.

2.     The manuscript will be sent back to comply with acceptable plagiarism criteria

3.     The manuscript will be sent back to make minor and major changes before blind-review.

4.     The JMS Editorial board will send the manuscripts clearing first phase of the peer-review process to the second phase of blind-review of international and national reviewers.

For the second phase, blind-reviewers will be selected from the journal reviewers' database based on subject expertise and reviewers' interest.

After receiving at least two external reviewers' (international and national) reports with recommendations, an email will be sent to the author containing reviewers' comments on the manuscript.

The author will be given maximum three weeks with clearly mentioned deadlines e.g. The deadline to submit the revised article is dd.mm.yy, to incorporate reviewers' comments and suggestions.

The author will need to provide a review report along with the revised manuscript, indicating how and where the changes are made in the manuscript.

Keeping in view the other academic/professional/personal commitments, authors can request extra time of one week to send back the revised manuscript.

After receiving the revised manuscript, the article will be reevaluated by the editorial board on the bases of the blind-review suggestions incorporation and author review report.

Keeping in view the blind review suggestions and author's revised manuscript, chief editor and editor will make a decision:

(1) accept*       (2) accept with minor revision**       (3) decide after major revision**       (4) reject***

The reasons for the decision will be communicated to the authors via email and online submission system.

*email correspondence and letter of acceptance (until final publication journal reserve the right to disclose article acceptance)

** minor/major revision is made, and the authors do not revise their articles satisfactorily after receiving reviewer reports. In the case of failing to comply with the quality criteria, submission deadline and revision requested will result in article rejection.

***the journal editorial board reserve the right to reject the article, if the author fails to incorporate suggestion after the blind-reviewers.

Note: Book review is internally reviewed and the editorial board decides to publish depending on the quality and relevance of the review to JMS subjects.

Estimated Timeline of Complete Peer-Review Process

*paper is returned to authors, either if it does not meet the basic criteria of the journal or plagiarism exceed the acceptance criteria of 16%.

** blind-review reports will be emailed to author containing minor or major revision.

*** authors are requested for further revision, if editors find that reviewers' suggestions have not been incorporated reasonably or might result in article rejection.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Journal of Media Studies

The Journal of Media Studies (Print ISSN 1812-7592; Online ISSN 2309-9577) is an interdisciplinary, bi-annual and double blind peer reviewed publication available online (http://journals.pu.edu.pk/journals/index.php/jms/index) and in print. Institute of Communication Studies, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan is regularly publishing this journal since 2010. 

JMS seeks to reflect a variety of intellectual traditions in the communication field to promote debate and dialogue. We encourage empirical, theoretical and methodological research papers contributing to the advancement of communication sciences as an interdisciplinary field. Original papers based on systematic reviews, meta-analysis and synthesis from diverse sources are welcomed. To advance indigenizing communication knowledge, JMS accepts papers in Urdu language with an abstract in English.

*Journal of Media Studies does not charge any article processing or submission charges.

Abstracting & Indexing

Directory for Research Journals Indexing - DRJI

Asia Pacific Media Educator - SAGE Publication

Asian Digital Library (ADL)

EBSCO Host

International Scientific Indexing - ISI

Public Knowledge Project -PKP Index

Scientific Journal Impact Factor - SJIF

International Institute of Organized Research -I2OR

Scientific Indexing Services - SIS

Index of Turkish Education 

J-Gate of Informatics

Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers  (NSD)

ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for Humanities and Social Sciences)

Electronic Journals Library (EJL)

RootIndexing - Journal Abstracting and  Indexing Service -RI

Internet Archive -IA

WorldCat 

OAJI - Open Academic Journal Index

IPI Indexing 

Tehqeeqat

Publication Ethics / Ethical Guideline

Research publications significantly contribute to the existing body of knowledge, development of the discipline, and progression in intellectuality. Therefore, it is essential to clearly chalk our ethical policy and guidelines to bring clarity for our authors, reviewers, and editors in the process of publishing the journal so that they can work in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. For our double blind and peer-reviewed journal, we are following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)'s Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the author, reviewer, and editor in performing their ethical duties.

Author's Responsibilities:

• The author should guarantee that the works he or she has submitted are original. If the author has used work and/or words by others, appropriate citations are required. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• Since it is author's responsibility to submit original article, however after plagiarism test, author will be approached in case of any violation.
• The author should remove his/her identity from the prescribed main documents and should not include any content that discloses author's identity.
• The author should honestly gather and interpret his or her research data. Publishers, editors, reviewers, and readers are entitled to request the author to provide the raw data for his or her research for convenience of editorial review and public access. If practicable, the author should retain such data for any possible use after publication.
• The author should not submit concurrent manuscripts (or manuscripts essentially describing the same subject matter) to multiple journals. Likewise, an author should not submit any paper previously published anywhere to the journals for consideration. The publication of articles on specific subject matter, such as guidelines and translations, in more than one journal is acceptable if certain conditions are met.
• The author should present a precise and brief report of his or her research and an impartial description of its significance.
• The author should indicate explicitly all sources that have supported the research and also declare any conflict(s) of interest.
• The author should give due acknowledgement to all of those who have made contributions to the research. Those who have contributed significantly to the research should be listed as coauthors.
• The author should ensure that all coauthors have affirmed the final version of the paper and have agreed on its final publication.
• The author should promptly inform the journal editor of any obvious error(s) in his or her published paper and cooperate earnestly with the editor in retraction or correction of the paper. If the editor is notified by any party other than the author that the published paper contains an obvious error, the author should write a retraction or make the correction based on the medium of publication.

• Fabrication and Falsification are serious forms of misconduct and in order to avoid it, Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of the manuscript for editorial review.

• Redundant publication (also known as 'salami publishing) involves segmenting or breaking up a large study into two or more publications. Authors are requested to be transparent. If they feel that their manuscript is closely related to some other manuscript, they are requested to send copies of that manuscript. This includes any manuscripts recently submitted, published, or already accepted.

Reviewer's Responsibilities

We follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)'s COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. In addition, some key points are listed below.

• The reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or affirms that he or she cannot meet the deadline for completion of the review should immediately notify the editor and excuse himself or herself from the process of reviewing this manuscript.
• The reviewer should inform the editor and recuse himself or herself from reviewing the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest. Specifically, the reviewer should recuse himself or herself from reviewing any manuscript authored or coauthored by a person with whom the reviewer has an obvious personal or academic relationship, if the relationship could introduce bias or the reasonable perception of bias.
• The reviewer should treat the manuscript in a confidential manner. The manuscript should not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• The reviewer should approach the peer-review job objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
• The reviewer should not use for his or her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
• The reviewer should immediately notify the editor of any similarities between the manuscript under review and another paper either published or under consideration by another journal. The reviewer should immediately call to the editor's attention a manuscript containing plagiarized material or falsified data.

Editor's Responsibilities

We follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)'s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. In addition, some key points are listed below.

• The Managing Editor acknowledges receipt of submitted manuscripts within one week of receipt and ensures an efficient, fair, and timely review process.
• The Managing Editor ensures that submitted manuscripts are processed in a confidential manner, and that no content of the manuscripts will be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• The editor will recuse herself from processing manuscripts if she has any conflict of interest with any of the authors or institutions related to the manuscripts.
• The editor will not disclose the names and other details of the reviewers to a third party without the permission of the reviewers.
• The editor has the right to make the final decision on whether to accept or reject a manuscript with reference to the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
• The editor will by no means make any effort to oblige the authors to cite her journal either as an implied or explicit condition of accepting their manuscripts for publication.
• The editor cannot use for her own research any part of any data or work reported in submitted and as yet unpublished articles.
• The editor will respond promptly and take reasonable measures when an ethical complaint occurs concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, and the editor will immediately contact and consult with the author. In this case, a written formal retraction or correction may also be required.

Criteria for Author, Co-Author & Non-Contributing Author

Journal of Media Studies follows the definition of authorship drafted by the COPE (https://publicationethics.org/files/COPE_DD_A4_Authorship_SEPT19_SCREEN_AW.pdf) and ICMEJ (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html) criteria for defining author or co-authorshhip.

Authorship conveys significant privileges, responsibilities, and legal rights; in the scholarly arena, it also forms the basis for rewards and career advancement. Various disciplines have norms, guidelines, and rules governing authorship; some of those rules preserve the lineage of ideas or works, assign credit for the conception, implementation and analysis of studies or experiments to validate theory or explain hypotheses, and the actual writing of work to disseminate knowledge. Authors are accountable for following discipline-specific guidelines when they engage in authorship activities; journal editors and publishers are accountable for making author guidelines transparent and appropriate for the medium and genre (scholarly books, journal articles, creative writing). At a minimum, authors should guarantee that they have participated in creating the work as presented and that they have not violated any other author's legal rights (eg, copyright) in the process.

Author Definition:

The term authorship can refer to the creator or originator of an idea (e.g. the author of the theory of relativity) or the individual or individuals who develop and bring to fruition the product that disseminates intellectual or creative works (e.g., the author of a poem or a scholarly article).

Criteria for distinguishing Author and Co-Author

Authorship criteria is based on the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work he or she has done, an author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

The individuals who conduct the work are responsible for identifying who meets these criteria and ideally should do so when planning the work, making modifications as appropriate as the work progresses. We encourage collaboration and co-authorship with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts. If agreement cannot be reached about who qualifies for authorship, the institution(s) where the work was performed, not the journal editor, should be asked to investigate. The criteria used to determine the order in which authors are listed on the byline may vary, and are to be decided collectively by the author group and not by editors. If authors request removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added.

Corresponding Author:

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal's administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more coauthors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication. Although the corresponding author has primary responsibility for correspondence with the journal, the ICMJE recommends that editors send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

Non-Author Contributors

Contributors who meet fewer than all 4 of the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but they should be acknowledged. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship are acquisition of funding; general supervision of a research group or general administrative support; and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading. Those whose contributions do not justify authorship may be acknowledged individually or together as a group under a single heading (e.g. "Clinical Investigators" or "Participating Investigators"), and their contributions should be specified (e.g., "served as scientific advisors," "critically reviewed the study proposal," "collected data," "provided and cared for study patients", "participated in writing or technical editing of the manuscript").