Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Law and Social Sciences (IJAILSS) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scholarly merit of all published research. Both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.
Review Timeline
| Stage | Duration | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Screening | 3–5 business days | Desk review by the Editor-in-Chief for scope, originality, and formatting compliance |
| Peer Review | 4–6 weeks | Evaluation by 2–3 independent expert reviewers |
| Author Revision | 2–4 weeks | Authors address reviewer comments and resubmit revised manuscript |
| Final Decision | 1–2 weeks | Editor-in-Chief makes final accept/reject decision |
| Publication | 1–2 weeks | Copyediting, typesetting, and online publication |
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
| Criterion | Description |
|---|---|
| Originality | Does the manuscript present novel findings or perspectives? |
| Significance | Does the research contribute meaningfully to the field? |
| Methodology | Are the research methods appropriate, rigorous, and clearly described? |
| Clarity | Is the manuscript well-written, logically organized, and clearly presented? |
| Literature Review | Is the existing literature adequately reviewed and cited? |
| Ethics | Does the research comply with ethical standards? |
| Relevance | Does the manuscript fall within the scope of IJAILSS? |
Decision Categories
| Decision | Description |
|---|---|
| Accept | The manuscript is accepted for publication as submitted |
| Minor Revisions | The manuscript requires minor changes before acceptance |
| Major Revisions | Substantial revisions are required; the manuscript will undergo re-review |
| Reject and Resubmit | The manuscript is rejected but may be resubmitted as a new submission after significant revision |
| Reject | The manuscript is not suitable for publication in IJAILSS |
Appeals Process
Authors who disagree with the editorial decision may submit a formal appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision. Appeals must include a detailed, point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments. The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may seek additional expert opinions before rendering a final decision.
Reviewer Guidelines
Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, and timely feedback. All review communications are confidential. Reviewers who identify conflicts of interest must disclose them immediately.
For questions about the review process: [email protected]
