Peer Review and Article Acceptance Process

The Journal of Data Analytics and Intelligent Decision-Making (JDAID) adheres to the highest standards of publication ethics, following the guidelines and policies of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Executive Bylaw for Prevention and Handling of Scientific Misconduct. The journal is committed to rigorous peer review and upholds the principles of transparency and integrity in scholarly publishing.

JDAID operates as an open-access journal with a double-blind peer review process, ensuring impartial evaluation. Neither authors nor reviewers are aware of each other’s identities, fostering objective, bias-free assessments. All submitted manuscripts—except editorials and letters to the editor—undergo this review process to verify methodological rigor, scholarly validity, and originality. Upon final editorial approval, accepted papers proceed to production.

Double-blind peer review minimizes bias by focusing solely on content, enhances scholarly quality, identifies prior research in the field, detects plagiarism, and plays a pivotal role in advancing science. Reviewers also stay updated on the latest developments in their domain. Typically, two reviewers with relevant expertise evaluate each manuscript, providing constructive feedback on strengths and weaknesses. Most submissions require revisions before acceptance.

Submission Guidelines

Authors must thoroughly review the Author Guidelines to ensure compliance with submission standards. Upon receipt, the corresponding author receives an acknowledgment email with a unique manuscript ID, which must be referenced in all subsequent communications. The manuscript is then assigned to two reviewers, with a response expected within six weeks. If accepted, authors revise the paper per reviewer feedback before final editorial review and typesetting.

After submission, authorship changes (additions, removals, or order adjustments) are not permitted. Correspondence should only concern the review process’s progress.

Review Process

JDAID employs a double-blind review system. Research and review articles are evaluated by two (2) editorial board members (an associate editor and another board member) and, if necessary, anonymized external reviewers (typically within 10 days of submission). Other article types are assessed by two board members, with decisions typically rendered within 4–6 weeks. Reviewer identities remain confidential to authors, and vice versa, to promote constructive critique.

Reviewers are selected by the editorial board based on their expertise and invited to evaluate submissions within one (1) month, though extensions may be granted. Reviewers must comply with COPE’s ethical guidelines, maintaining confidentiality, avoiding public discussion of manuscripts, and respecting authors’ intellectual property.

Manuscripts are assessed for originality, novelty, academic merit, and relevance using standardized criteria. Reviewers are chosen based on subject-matter expertise, though authors may suggest non-conflicted reviewers. Submissions may be accepted with minor/major revisions or rejected if they fail to meet JDAID’s standards.

Editorial Collaboration

Editors and reviewers collaborate with authors to ensure high-quality publications. Requests to exclude specific reviewers are honored if justified. Revised manuscripts must be resubmitted within one (1) month of the decision. Authors dissatisfied with a decision may appeal to the editor-in-chief, who reviews all documentation (manuscript, correspondence, reviews, etc.) and issues a final decision within one (1) month.

Decision Categories

After each review round, reviewers assess revisions and prior feedback. Final decisions are made by the editor-in-chief and editorial board, ensuring excellence and rigor. Options include:

1. Acceptance: The manuscript meets JDAID’s standards for publication.

2. Revision: Authors address reviewer comments and resubmit for evaluation. If one reviewer requests major revisions and another rejects, a third reviewer breaks the tie. If both demand major revisions, the revised manuscript is re-evaluated by one of the original reviewers.

3. Rejection: The manuscript contains irreparable flaws. If both reviewers reject, the decision is final.

Authors must address all reviewer comments promptly after the first round. The acceptance process typically takes ~24 weeks post-final approval.

Proofreading and Typesetting

After acceptance, the manuscript undergoes copyediting and layout. Authors receive a proof for final corrections (limited to typographical or formatting errors; substantive changes are prohibited at this stage).

Publication

Upon approval of the final proof, the article is published online. Authors are notified immediately. Occasionally, publication may be delayed to coordinate simultaneous issue releases.

Appeals

Authors may appeal decisions within 15 days of notification by emailing the editor-in-chief with a detailed justification and responses to reviewer comments. If warranted, the manuscript is sent to a new reviewer. The editor’s decision is final.

Privacy Statement

Names and email addresses submitted to JDAID are used exclusively for journal purposes and are not shared with third parties.