Editorial process
Peer review at AJESI
Double-blind peer review, augmented by AI assistance — with humans always in the loop. Average time to first decision: 8 weeks.
1. Editorial screening
Every submission is first reviewed by the Section Editor for fit with the journal's scope and basic completeness. To accelerate this step, an AI screening assistant produces a preliminary structured assessment (scope fit, structural completeness, language quality, ethics flags). The Section Editor considers — but is not bound by — this assessment, and is the sole authority for any desk-decision.
2. Peer review
Suitable submissions are sent to at least two independent peer reviewers under a double-blind protocol. Reviewers receive a structured review form and an AI-generated draft review they may consult, adopt, or discard. Final reviews are entirely the reviewer's own work.
3. Editorial decision
The Section Editor weighs all reviews and recommends one of: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. Authors receive the editor's decision along with anonymized reviewer comments.
4. Revisions and acceptance
Authors submit revised manuscripts with a response to reviewers. The editor may send revisions back to the original reviewers or make a final decision.
5. Production and publication
Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting and production. An AI formatter produces a first-pass HTML galley conforming to the journal style; a Production Editor reviews and finalizes before publication. Authors approve proofs prior to release.
A note on AI assistance
AI assistance accelerates editorial work but never substitutes for human judgment. AI outputs are clearly labeled, fully auditable, and reviewed by editors before any action. No editorial decision — including desk-rejection — is ever taken automatically.