Manuscript Review and Evaluation Process

AIPA's International Journal on AI: Bridging Technology, Society, and Policy is committed to ensuring the highest standards of academic rigor and integrity through a comprehensive and transparent peer review process. Below is a detailed outline of the manuscript review and evaluation process:

1. Initial Submission Authors submit their manuscripts through our online submission system, ensuring that all required information, such as author names, titles, affiliations, department names, city information, and ORCID codes, are included. Manuscripts must comply with the journal’s submission guidelines to proceed further.

2. Editorial Office Assessment The Editorial Office performs an initial check to ensure that the manuscript meets the basic formatting and submission requirements specified in the journal’s guidelines. This initial screening does not involve an assessment of the content’s quality.

3. Plagiarism Check Each submission undergoes a rigorous plagiarism detection process using advanced tools. Manuscripts that pass this check are moved to the next stage. Submissions with significant plagiarism issues are rejected.

4. Editor-in-Chief (EIC) Evaluation The EIC reviews the manuscript to assess its scope, originality, and overall quality. At this stage, the EIC decides whether the manuscript aligns with the journal’s standards and objectives. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable are rejected, while those that meet the criteria are assigned to an Associate Editor (AE).

5. Assignment to Associate Editor (AE) The AE takes charge of the peer review process. They select appropriate reviewers based on their expertise, ensuring a fair and thorough review. Typically, two reviewers are assigned to each manuscript, although this number can vary depending on the subject matter and complexity.

6. Invitation to Reviewers Reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript. They consider their expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and availability before accepting or declining the invitation. The journal employs a double-blind review process where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other.

7. Conducting the Review Reviewers assess the manuscript’s content, methodology, originality, and significance. They provide detailed feedback on the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses and suggest revisions if necessary. The review is thorough, often involving multiple readings of the manuscript to form a comprehensive evaluation. The standard review period is 30 days. If a reviewer does not respond within this timeframe, the AE appoints a new reviewer​.

8. Review Evaluation and Decision The AE compiles the feedback from all reviewers and makes a recommendation to the EIC. If there is significant divergence in the reviewers’ opinions, an additional reviewer may be consulted. Based on the reviewers’ feedback, the EIC makes a final decision on the manuscript. The possible outcomes include:

  • Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted as is.
  • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor adjustments before final acceptance.
  • Major Revisions: Significant changes are needed, and the revised manuscript may undergo another round of review.
  • Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards and is not accepted for publication​

9. Communicating the Decision The decision, along with detailed reviewer comments, is communicated to the author. This feedback is intended to help authors improve their manuscript, whether it is accepted or needs further revision.

10. Revisions and Resubmission If revisions are requested, the authors must address the reviewers’ comments and resubmit the revised manuscript. Authors should provide a detailed response letter outlining how each comment was addressed. The revised manuscript is then reevaluated by the AE, and if necessary, by the original reviewers.

11. Final Decision Upon receiving the revised manuscript, the AE and EIC review the changes and make a final decision. Depending on the extent of the revisions, the manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers for additional feedback. If accepted, the manuscript moves forward to the production stage, including copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading​.

12. Production and Publication Accepted manuscripts undergo a thorough production process to ensure clarity, accuracy, and adherence to the journal’s formatting standards. This includes copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading. Once finalized, the manuscript is published in the next available issue of the journal.

13. Post-Publication After publication, authors are encouraged to promote their work through academic networks, social media, conferences, and collaborations. Engaging with the scientific community helps increase the visibility and impact of their research.

Review Criteria Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several key criteria:

  • Title and Content Compatibility: Ensuring the title accurately reflects the manuscript’s content.
  • Scientific and Original Contribution: Assessing the novelty and significance of the research.
  • Language and Expression: Evaluating the clarity, style, and readability.
  • Methodology and Scope: Checking the robustness of the research methods and the breadth of the study.
  • Integration and Coherence: Ensuring the study presents a unified and coherent narrative.
  • Use of Sources: Assessing the integration of primary and recent sources.
  • Contribution to the Field: Determining the study’s impact and relevance to its field.
  • Terminology Mastery: Checking the appropriate use of technical terms.
  • Results and Conclusions: Ensuring conclusions are evidence-based and logically derived from the data.

Ethical Considerations The journal adheres to the highest ethical standards in publishing. This includes ensuring the safety and rights of research participants, maintaining confidentiality, and preventing conflicts of interest. Authors must comply with ethical guidelines, and any ethical concerns are addressed rigorously.

Author Rights and Responsibilities

  • Confidentiality: The journal follows a double-blind review process to maintain anonymity.
  • Right to Appeal: Authors can appeal decisions with supporting data. Appeals are reviewed by the editorial board, and additional reviewers may be consulted if necessary.
  • Copyright and Usage: Published studies can be used with proper citation of the journal. Legal actions are taken against unauthorized use without reference.

Timeline The evaluation process aims to be completed within six months, excluding the time taken by authors for revisions. This ensures timely feedback and publication of high-quality research.

Conclusion By following these rigorous and transparent processes, AIPA's International Journal on AI ensures the publication of impactful and high-quality research, contributing significantly to the field of artificial intelligence and its applications across various domains.