About the Press

PTI Press is the official publishing imprint of the Philippine Technical Institute, Inc. It was established to support the creation, publication, and dissemination of scholarly, technical, vocational, and professional knowledge. As an emerging academic and research-oriented press, it provides authors, educators, researchers, professionals, and industry practitioners with a credible platform for sharing works that advance education, skills development, innovation, and lifelong learning.

The press publishes academic books, edited volumes, training manuals, instructional materials, research monographs, conference proceedings, and other knowledge-based resources. Its publications cover technical-vocational education, higher education, professional development, applied research, technology, and industry practices.

PTI Press is committed to producing accessible, relevant, and quality publications that respond to the needs of students, educators, academic institutions, professionals, industries, and communities. It also promotes research collaboration and knowledge exchange among educational institutions, industry experts, researchers, and professional organizations.

Through responsible and purpose-driven publishing, PTI Press supports the mission of the Philippine Technical Institute, Inc. to advance education, workforce development, research, and innovation in the Philippines and beyond.

PTI PRESS EDITORIAL AND BOOK REVIEW POLICY

1. Purpose

This policy establishes the editorial evaluation, peer-review, quality-assurance, and publication procedures of PTI Press, the publishing division of the Philippine Technical Institute, Inc.

The policy recognizes that different kinds of books require different levels of review. Scholarly publications presenting original research or academic arguments require independent external peer review. Reference, instructional, professional, literary, and creative publications may undergo editorial, technical, structural, or literary evaluation appropriate to their nature and intended audience.

PTI Press shall clearly identify whether a published book has undergone:

  1. Full external peer review;

  2. Limited academic or technical review;

  3. Editorial and structural review; or

  4. Literary or creative editorial evaluation.

A book shall not be described as “peer reviewed” unless it has completed the applicable independent external peer-review process prescribed in this policy.

2. Classification of Books

Category A: Academic Research Monograph

An academic research monograph is a sustained scholarly work written by one author or a small group of authors. It normally presents original research, a new interpretation, a theoretical contribution, or a substantial synthesis of existing scholarship.

Examples include:

  • Research-based academic books;

  • Revised dissertations or theses substantially converted into books;

  • Theoretical or conceptual monographs;

  • Research-based policy studies;

  • Scholarly case studies;

  • Discipline-specific academic analyses; and

  • Books reporting the results of funded research projects.

Required Review

  • Preliminary editorial screening;

  • Research integrity and originality screening;

  • Double-anonymous external peer review;

  • Minimum of two independent external reviewers;

  • Author revision and response to reviewers;

  • Editorial verification of revisions;

  • Editorial Board approval; and

  • Copyediting, formatting, proofreading, and production review.

Publication Classification

Externally Peer-Reviewed Academic Book

Category B: Academic Edited Book

An academic edited book is a scholarly volume composed of chapters written by different contributors and organized by one or more volume editors around a clearly defined academic theme.

Examples include:

  • Research anthologies;

  • Thematic academic collections;

  • International or multidisciplinary edited volumes;

  • Research-based conference-derived collections;

  • Scholarly handbooks presenting original chapters; and

  • Books containing independently authored academic chapters.

Required Review

The review shall be conducted at two levels.

A. Volume-Level Review

The complete edited volume shall be evaluated based on:

  • Overall academic contribution;

  • Coherence of the volume;

  • Relevance of the chapters to the central theme;

  • Quality of the introduction and concluding synthesis;

  • Balance of topics and perspectives;

  • Logical organization;

  • Consistency among chapters;

  • Duplication or unnecessary overlap; and

  • Suitability for the intended academic audience.

At least two independent external reviewers shall review the complete volume or a substantially complete manuscript.

B. Chapter-Level Review

Each academic chapter shall undergo double-anonymous review by:

  • At least two reviewers, where sufficient qualified reviewers are available; or

  • At least one independent chapter reviewer, provided that the complete volume is separately reviewed by two external volume reviewers.

The volume editors may conduct preliminary screening and developmental editing, but they shall not serve as the only reviewers of the chapters.

Required Editorial Documentation

The volume editor shall submit:

  • A summary of the review process;

  • Reviewer reports;

  • Author revision records;

  • A chapter-by-chapter response matrix; and

  • A certification that all accepted chapters have addressed the required revisions.

Publication Classification

Externally Peer-Reviewed Academic Edited Book

Category C: Academic Textbook or Instructional Book

An academic textbook or instructional book is designed primarily for teaching, structured learning, curriculum delivery, laboratory instruction, competency development, or guided study.

Examples include:

  • College textbooks;

  • Graduate-level textbooks;

  • Laboratory manuals;

  • Course books;

  • Modules and instructional materials;

  • Professional review books;

  • Technical training books; and

  • Competency-based learning materials.

Required Review

  • Preliminary editorial screening;

  • Curriculum and audience assessment;

  • Content review by at least two qualified academic or professional reviewers;

  • Review of learning outcomes and chapter organization;

  • Review of examples, exercises, activities, and assessments;

  • Verification of references and attribution;

  • Technical review where specialized procedures are included;

  • Copyediting and proofreading; and

  • Editorial Board approval.

The review may be single-anonymous or double-anonymous depending on the discipline and availability of reviewers. Double-anonymous review remains the preferred method.

Publication Classification

Academically and Technically Reviewed Textbook

A textbook shall only be described as “externally peer reviewed” when it has completed the same independent external review requirements applied to academic monographs.

Category D: Academic Reference Book

An academic reference book is designed primarily to organize, summarize, explain, or provide convenient access to established information rather than to present a single original scholarly argument.

Examples include:

  • Dictionaries;

  • Encyclopedias;

  • Compendiums;

  • Directories;

  • Glossaries;

  • Bibliographies;

  • Catalogues;

  • Chronologies;

  • Reference handbooks;

  • Data books; and

  • Collections of standards, definitions, or established procedures.

Required Review

Reference books shall normally undergo a limited editorial and structural review focusing primarily on:

  • Organization and arrangement of entries;

  • Consistency of headings and subheadings;

  • Formatting and style;

  • Internal structure;

  • Completeness of front matter and back matter;

  • Cross-references;

  • Tables, figures, appendices, and supplementary materials;

  • Indexing and navigability;

  • Citation and reference-list consistency;

  • Uniformity of terminology;

  • Compliance with the PTI Press style guide; and

  • Copyright and permission requirements.

The reviewer or editor may identify obvious factual inconsistencies, unsupported claims, attribution problems, or outdated material. However, the review shall not be represented as a comprehensive validation of every factual entry unless a formal substantive review has been commissioned.

Minimum Review Requirement

  • One editorial or technical reviewer; and

  • One production or formatting reviewer.

External academic peer review is not required unless:

  • The book presents original research;

  • The entries contain substantial interpretive arguments;

  • The book claims to establish new knowledge;

  • The Editorial Board determines that substantive expert validation is necessary; or

  • The author requests formal academic peer review and PTI Press approves the request.

Publication Classification

Editorially and Structurally Reviewed Reference Book

The copyright page shall not state that the book is peer reviewed unless it completed the full external peer-review process.

Category E: Professional, Technical, and Practical Book

This category includes publications intended primarily for professional practice, workplace use, skills development, institutional operations, or public guidance.

Examples include:

  • Professional manuals;

  • Technical manuals;

  • Training manuals;

  • Practitioner handbooks;

  • User guides;

  • Policy guides;

  • Business books;

  • Entrepreneurship guides;

  • Software manuals;

  • Institutional procedures; and

  • Community education materials.

Required Review

  • Editorial screening;

  • Review by at least one qualified practitioner or technical expert;

  • Verification of organization, usability, and clarity;

  • Review of procedures, examples, diagrams, or instructions;

  • Legal, safety, or regulatory review when applicable;

  • Copyediting and formatting; and

  • Final approval by the responsible editor.

Publication Classification

Professionally or Technically Reviewed Book

It shall not automatically be identified as an academically peer-reviewed book.

Category F: Conference Proceedings

Conference proceedings contain papers, abstracts, presentations, or scholarly contributions originating from an academic or professional conference.

Review Options

Peer-Reviewed Proceedings

The proceedings may be classified as peer reviewed when:

  • Every included paper underwent documented academic peer review;

  • At least two qualified reviewers evaluated each full paper, or another review model approved by the Editorial Board was followed;

  • Reviewer comments and author revisions are documented; and

  • The conference’s scientific or technical committee certifies the review process.

Editorially Reviewed Proceedings

Proceedings containing abstracts, speeches, presentation summaries, or papers selected only by conference organizers shall undergo editorial and formatting review but shall not be classified as peer reviewed.

Publication Classification

The copyright page shall state either:

  • Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceedings; or

  • Editorially Reviewed Conference Proceedings.

Category G: Literary and Creative Works

Literary and creative publications are works whose principal contribution is artistic, imaginative, expressive, cultural, or literary rather than academic or research based.

Examples include:

  • Novels;

  • Novellas;

  • Short-story collections;

  • Poetry collections;

  • Creative nonfiction;

  • Personal essays;

  • Memoirs and autobiographies;

  • Plays and scripts;

  • Children’s literature;

  • Graphic narratives;

  • Comics;

  • Art books;

  • Photography books;

  • Songbooks;

  • Music scores;

  • Creative translations; and

  • Other original literary or artistic works.

Review Status

Literary and creative works are not required to undergo academic peer review.

They shall undergo an appropriate editorial evaluation that may include:

  • Literary merit;

  • Originality;

  • Narrative or thematic coherence;

  • Language and style;

  • Characterization, pacing, imagery, or artistic execution;

  • Suitability for the intended audience;

  • Cultural and ethical considerations;

  • Potential defamation, privacy, or legal concerns;

  • Copyright and permissions;

  • Copyediting; and

  • Proofreading.

A literary editor, creative editor, subject consultant, sensitivity reader, or cultural consultant may be appointed when appropriate.

Publication Classification

Editorially Selected Creative Work

The copyright page shall clearly state that the publication was selected through literary or creative editorial evaluation and was not subjected to academic peer review.

Category H: Institutional and Commemorative Publications

This category includes:

  • Institutional histories;

  • Anniversary books;

  • Souvenir programs;

  • Annual reports;

  • Project reports;

  • Commemorative books;

  • Coffee-table books;

  • Organizational profiles;

  • Event publications;

  • Speeches and message compilations; and

  • Public information materials.

Required Review

  • Administrative verification;

  • Editorial review;

  • Fact-checking by the originating office;

  • Copyright and permissions review;

  • Copyediting;

  • Formatting and design review; and

  • Approval by the authorized institutional representative.

Publication Classification

Institutionally and Editorially Reviewed Publication

These publications shall not be classified as academically peer reviewed unless their scholarly contents have separately completed formal external peer review.

3. Default Review Mode

Anonymous Reviewer/Anonymous Author

The default academic review mode of PTI Press shall be:

Anonymous Reviewer/Anonymous Author

This is also known as double-anonymous peer review.

Under this arrangement:

  • Reviewers shall not be informed of the identities of the authors;

  • Authors shall not be informed of the identities of the reviewers;

  • Author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, biographies, and identifying metadata shall be removed from the review file;

  • Reviewers shall avoid including identifying information in their reports;

  • Communications between authors and reviewers shall be managed by the assigned editor; and

  • Reviewer identities shall be treated as confidential unless disclosure is required by law or expressly authorized by the reviewer and PTI Press.

Double-anonymous review shall be used for academic monographs, academic edited books, and other scholarly works requiring formal peer review.

The Editorial Board may approve single-anonymous, open, or collaborative review when justified by disciplinary practice, reviewer availability, manuscript type, or the nature of the publication. Any alternative review method shall be documented.

4. Restrict File Access

Reviewers shall have access to the submission file only after formally agreeing to undertake the review.

The reviewer must first:

  1. Open the review invitation;

  2. Examine the title, abstract, subject area, and expected review schedule;

  3. Declare any actual or potential conflict of interest;

  4. Agree to the confidentiality requirements;

  5. Accept the review assignment; and

  6. Agree not to distribute, reproduce, upload, or use the manuscript for any unauthorized purpose.

The full manuscript and supplementary files shall become accessible only after the reviewer accepts the assignment.

Reviewers shall not upload confidential manuscripts or substantial portions of manuscripts to publicly accessible artificial-intelligence platforms, external editing systems, or third-party services without written authorization from PTI Press.

5. One-Click Reviewer Access

PTI Press may provide reviewers with an individual secure link in the email invitation.

The secure link may automatically authenticate the invited reviewer and provide direct access to the review assignment.

The following controls shall apply:

  • The link shall be unique to the invited reviewer;

  • The link shall not be publicly shared or forwarded;

  • Access to the manuscript shall remain restricted until the reviewer agrees to review;

  • The reviewer may be required to confirm identity and conflict-of-interest declarations;

  • PTI Press may deactivate the link when the review is completed, declined, reassigned, or withdrawn; and

  • Suspected unauthorized access shall be immediately reported to the Managing Editor.

Platform Setting

Include a secure link in the email invitation to reviewers: Enabled

6. Reviewer Suggestions at Submission

Authors may suggest potential reviewers before completing the submission.

Platform Setting

Allow authors to suggest potential reviewers during the submission process: Enabled

Authors may normally suggest three to five potential reviewers and should provide:

  • Complete name;

  • Institutional affiliation;

  • Official email address;

  • Field of expertise;

  • Relevant publication or professional background; and

  • Brief explanation of the reviewer’s suitability.

Author suggestions are advisory only. PTI Press is not required to invite any suggested reviewer.

The editor shall independently verify the reviewer’s identity, expertise, publication record, institutional affiliation, and possible conflicts of interest.

Suggested reviewers should not:

  • Be employed by the same institution as the author;

  • Be a current or recent student, adviser, supervisor, or subordinate of the author;

  • Have co-authored a publication with the author within the preceding five years;

  • Have participated directly in preparing the manuscript;

  • Have a close personal or family relationship with the author;

  • Have a financial interest in the publication;

  • Be involved in an unresolved professional dispute with the author; or

  • Have any relationship that may reasonably affect impartiality.

PTI Press may invite reviewers who were not suggested by the author. The final selection of reviewers rests exclusively with the assigned editor or Editorial Board.

7. Reviewer Qualifications

A reviewer shall possess appropriate expertise demonstrated through one or more of the following:

  • A relevant doctoral or terminal degree;

  • Substantial research or publication experience;

  • Recognized professional or technical expertise;

  • Previous authorship of scholarly books or peer-reviewed publications;

  • Academic teaching or research experience in the subject area;

  • Professional certification or licensure, where applicable; or

  • Other qualifications accepted by the Editorial Board.

For interdisciplinary manuscripts, reviewers representing different relevant disciplines may be appointed.

Volume editors, series editors, book authors, chapter authors, and persons directly involved in preparing a manuscript shall not serve as the sole independent reviewers of the same work.

8. Default Response and Completion Deadlines

Default Response Deadline

Number of weeks allowed to accept or decline a review request: 4 weeks

The reviewer should accept or decline as early as possible. Failure to respond within four weeks shall allow the editor to cancel or reassign the invitation.

Default Completion Deadline

Number of weeks allowed to complete the review after acceptance: 4 weeks

Extensions may be approved when justified. A reviewer requesting an extension should contact the assigned editor before the deadline.

Because books are substantially longer than journal articles, the editor may approve a longer review period for unusually lengthy, technical, multidisciplinary, or multilingual manuscripts.

9. Review Reminders

Automated email reminders shall be enabled.

Reminders may be sent for:

  1. A pending response to a review invitation; and

  2. A review report that has not been submitted by the completion deadline.

Recommended Reminder Schedule

Review Invitation Response

  • First reminder: 14 days after the invitation;

  • Second reminder: 7 days before the response deadline;

  • Final reminder: On the response deadline; and

  • Cancellation or reassignment notice: After the deadline when no response is received.

Review Completion

  • First reminder: 14 days before the completion deadline;

  • Second reminder: 7 days before the completion deadline;

  • Due-date reminder: On the completion deadline;

  • Overdue reminder: 7 days after the deadline; and

  • Reassignment consideration: 14 days after the deadline unless an extension has been approved.

Reminder messages shall remain professional and shall recognize that reviewers normally provide their service voluntarily.

10. Minimum Confirmed Reviews Required

Global Platform Setting

Minimum number of confirmed reviews required for a submission: 0

This global setting may be retained only because PTI Press processes both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications in the same publishing platform.

A value of zero shall not mean that academic books may be accepted without review. The responsible editor must enforce the following category-specific requirements.

Book Classification Minimum Required Reviews
Academic Research Monograph 2 independent external reviews
Academic Edited Book 2 external volume reviews, plus required chapter reviews
Academic Textbook 2 academic or technical reviews
Peer-Reviewed Conference Proceedings Review of every included full paper according to the approved conference review plan
Academic Reference Book 1 editorial or technical review and 1 formatting review
Professional or Technical Book At least 1 qualified technical or professional review
Literary or Creative Work 0 academic peer reviews; literary editorial evaluation required
Institutional or Commemorative Publication 0 academic peer reviews; administrative and editorial verification required

Where the platform permits separate settings for different series or publication categories, PTI Press should use:

  • Academic Books Series: Minimum 2 confirmed reviews

  • Reference and Professional Books Series: Minimum 1 confirmed review

  • Literary and Creative Works Series: Minimum 0 confirmed reviews

  • Institutional Publications Series: Minimum 0 confirmed reviews

No editor may issue a final acceptance decision for an academic monograph or academic edited book until the required external reviews have been completed and documented.

11. Standard Editorial and Review Workflow

Stage 1: Submission

The author or volume editor submits:

  • Complete manuscript;

  • Book proposal;

  • Author or editor information;

  • Abstract or book description;

  • Table of contents;

  • Keywords;

  • Intended audience;

  • Contributor information;

  • Declaration of originality;

  • Conflict-of-interest declaration;

  • Copyright and permission documents;

  • AI-use disclosure, when applicable; and

  • Suggested reviewers, when provided.

Stage 2: Administrative Screening

The Editorial Office checks:

  • Completeness of files;

  • Compliance with submission guidelines;

  • Required declarations;

  • File readability;

  • Author information;

  • Manuscript length;

  • Reference style;

  • Figures, tables, and permissions; and

  • General formatting.

Incomplete submissions may be returned before editorial evaluation.

Stage 3: Book Classification

The Managing Editor classifies the manuscript according to the categories established in this policy.

The author’s preferred classification may be considered, but the final classification shall be determined by PTI Press.

Stage 4: Editorial Desk Review

The assigned editor evaluates:

  • Relevance to the mission and publishing scope of PTI Press;

  • Suitability for the intended audience;

  • General quality and readability;

  • Completeness and organization;

  • Academic or professional significance;

  • Potential legal or ethical concerns;

  • Feasibility of publication; and

  • Whether the manuscript should proceed to formal review.

A manuscript may be declined at this stage without external review.

Stage 5: Research Integrity and Rights Screening

Where applicable, PTI Press shall examine:

  • Originality;

  • Plagiarism or excessive textual similarity;

  • Duplicate publication;

  • Authorship concerns;

  • Citation practices;

  • Research ethics approval;

  • Participant confidentiality;

  • Fabrication or falsification concerns;

  • Copyright ownership;

  • Image, table, and figure permissions;

  • Defamation and privacy risks; and

  • Disclosure of artificial-intelligence-assisted content.

Passing an automated similarity check shall not, by itself, establish originality or publication readiness.

Stage 6: Reviewer Selection

The editor selects qualified and independent reviewers based on:

  • Subject expertise;

  • Relevant academic or professional experience;

  • Absence of conflicts of interest;

  • Independence from the authors and editors;

  • Ability to complete the review; and

  • Diversity of disciplinary, institutional, methodological, or geographic perspectives where appropriate.

Stage 7: External or Editorial Review

The manuscript is reviewed according to its assigned classification.

Reviewer reports shall be substantive, respectful, evidence-based, and focused on improving or evaluating the work.

Stage 8: Editorial Decision

The editor may issue one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept;

  2. Accept subject to minor revisions;

  3. Major revisions required;

  4. Revise and resubmit for another review round;

  5. Refer to an additional reviewer;

  6. Transfer to another publication category; or

  7. Reject.

A positive reviewer recommendation does not automatically require acceptance. The final decision belongs to PTI Press.

Stage 9: Author Revision

Authors shall submit:

  • A revised manuscript;

  • A point-by-point response to reviewer comments;

  • A list of major changes;

  • Justification for recommendations not followed; and

  • Any updated permissions or declarations.

Stage 10: Verification or Re-Review

Minor revisions may be verified by the editor.

Major revisions may be returned to:

  • The original reviewers;

  • A new reviewer;

  • A technical consultant; or

  • The Editorial Board.

Stage 11: Final Editorial Approval

The assigned editor prepares an editorial recommendation supported by:

  • Reviewer reports;

  • Author responses;

  • Revised manuscript;

  • Integrity screening results; and

  • Compliance documentation.

Academic books shall be approved by the PTI Press Editorial Board or its authorized academic publishing committee.

Stage 12: Production

Accepted manuscripts proceed to:

  • Developmental editing, when required;

  • Copyediting;

  • Reference and citation consistency checking;

  • Layout and typesetting;

  • Cover preparation;

  • ISBN and metadata preparation;

  • Index preparation, when applicable;

  • Author proofreading; and

  • Final production inspection.

Stage 13: Publication

The published book shall display its applicable review classification in:

  • The copyright page;

  • Online book description;

  • Catalogue metadata;

  • Repository record; and

  • Other appropriate publication information.

12. Review Criteria for Academic Monographs

Reviewers shall evaluate:

  1. Originality and scholarly contribution;

  2. Importance of the subject;

  3. Accuracy and depth of the literature review;

  4. Soundness of methodology or analytical approach;

  5. Quality of evidence;

  6. Validity of conclusions;

  7. Coherence of the central argument;

  8. Organization and chapter progression;

  9. Ethical treatment of research participants or data;

  10. Appropriate acknowledgment of limitations;

  11. Accuracy and adequacy of references;

  12. Quality of tables, figures, and supplementary materials;

  13. Clarity of writing;

  14. Suitability for the intended audience;

  15. Contribution to teaching, research, policy, or professional practice; and

  16. Readiness for publication.

13. Review Criteria for Academic Edited Books

Reviewers shall evaluate:

  1. Importance and timeliness of the volume theme;

  2. Coherence of the book as a unified publication;

  3. Strength of the introductory framework;

  4. Relevance of each chapter;

  5. Quality and originality of chapter contributions;

  6. Balance of topics, methods, cases, and perspectives;

  7. Unnecessary repetition or contradiction;

  8. Consistency of terminology and citation style;

  9. Strength of the concluding synthesis;

  10. Representation of current scholarship;

  11. Contribution beyond an ordinary collection of unrelated papers;

  12. Quality of the editorial work;

  13. Suitability for the intended market or audience; and

  14. Overall publication readiness.

14. Review Criteria for Reference Books

The limited editorial and structural review shall examine:

  1. Logical organization;

  2. Consistent entry format;

  3. Appropriate use of headings and subheadings;

  4. Alphabetical, chronological, thematic, or systematic arrangement;

  5. Cross-reference accuracy;

  6. Consistency of definitions and terminology;

  7. Citation and reference formatting;

  8. Table and figure presentation;

  9. Index, glossary, appendix, and navigation quality;

  10. Internal consistency;

  11. Completeness of required sections;

  12. Copyright and permissions;

  13. Conformity with the PTI Press style guide; and

  14. General usability.

This process shall not be called full academic peer review unless independent subject experts have substantively evaluated the complete content.

15. Conflicting Reviewer Recommendations

When reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the editor may:

  • Examine the reasoning and evidence in each report;

  • Request clarification from the reviewers;

  • Invite a third independent reviewer;

  • Ask the author to respond to the disputed issues;

  • Seek advice from a member of the Editorial Board; or

  • Reject the manuscript when serious concerns remain unresolved.

A simple numerical vote shall not replace reasoned editorial judgment.

16. Reviewer Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers shall:

  • Treat manuscripts and review materials as confidential;

  • Use the manuscript only for the assigned review;

  • Declare conflicts of interest;

  • Decline assignments outside their expertise;

  • Provide objective and constructive comments;

  • Avoid personal, insulting, discriminatory, or defamatory remarks;

  • Identify relevant uncited scholarship when appropriate;

  • Report suspected plagiarism, fabrication, unethical research, or duplicate publication;

  • Avoid using unpublished information for personal advantage;

  • Submit reports within the agreed schedule; and

  • Inform the editor when assistance has been received from another person.

The editor shall protect reviewer identities under the anonymous review model.

17. Required Publication Statements

For Academic Monographs

This book underwent double-anonymous peer review by at least two independent external reviewers. The authors revised the manuscript in response to the reviewers’ recommendations before final approval by PTI Press.

For Academic Edited Books

This edited book underwent double-anonymous academic review. The complete volume was evaluated by independent external reviewers, and its scholarly chapters were reviewed according to the peer-review procedures of PTI Press.

For Academic Textbooks

This textbook underwent academic and technical review by qualified reviewers and was revised in accordance with their recommendations.

For Reference Books

This reference book underwent editorial and structural review focusing on organization, consistency, formatting, cross-referencing, and usability. It was not subjected to full academic peer review.

For Professional and Technical Books

This publication underwent professional or technical evaluation and editorial review appropriate to its intended purpose and audience.

For Literary and Creative Works

This creative work was selected through literary and editorial evaluation. It was not subjected to academic peer review.

For Institutional Publications

This publication underwent institutional verification, editorial review, and production quality assurance. It was not subjected to academic peer review.

18. Transparency and Record Retention

PTI Press shall retain appropriate records of:

  • Manuscript submission;

  • Book classification;

  • Reviewer invitations;

  • Reviewer acceptance or decline;

  • Conflict-of-interest declarations;

  • Review reports;

  • Editorial decisions;

  • Author responses;

  • Revised manuscripts;

  • Editorial Board approval;

  • Copyright permissions; and

  • Final publication classification.

Review records shall be accessible only to authorized PTI Press personnel, except when disclosure is required by law, institutional policy, publication-ethics investigation, or written agreement.

19. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Concerns

PTI Press may issue:

  • Errata;

  • Corrigenda;

  • Revised editions;

  • Expressions of concern;

  • Withdrawal notices; or

  • Retraction notices.

Actions shall depend on the seriousness of the error or ethical concern. Minor typographical errors that do not affect meaning may be corrected in later digital or print versions without a formal notice.

20. Final Policy Principle

The intensity of review shall correspond to the nature and claims of the publication.

Academic works presenting original research, scholarly interpretation, or substantial academic arguments require independent external peer review. Reference, professional, institutional, literary, and creative works require appropriate editorial quality assurance but shall not be inaccurately presented as peer-reviewed scholarship.

PTI Press shall prioritize quality, fairness, transparency, confidentiality, academic integrity, and accurate description of the review process applied to every publication.