Peer-review Process

Policy Double-Blind Peer Review

JASSS operates a double-blind peer review process in which author identities are withheld from reviewers and reviewer identities are withheld from authors throughout the review cycle.

Stage 1 — Editorial Screening

An assigned Editor conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript against the Focus and Scope, checking that its subject matter falls within one or more of the three pillars and that its claims are adequately supported by the evidence presented.

Stage 2 — External Review

Manuscripts passing initial screening are sent to a minimum of two reviewers selected according to pillar mapping. Reviewers assess submissions against the following criteria:

Methodological Rigor Soundness of research design, data quality, and analytical or statistical method.
Originality and Contribution The extent to which the manuscript advances the existing body of knowledge within its pillar.
Cross-Pillar Linkage (Where applicable) For manuscripts addressing more than one pillar, whether the connection between pillars is demonstrated with evidence rather than merely asserted.
Clarity and Structure Adherence to standard scientific writing conventions and the Author Guidelines set out below.

Stage 3 — Editorial Decision

The assigned Editor synthesizes the reviewer reports and issues a decision — accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject — which is confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief before communication to the author.

⏱ Target Timeline: 6–8 weeks from submission for a first decision.