Peer Review Policy

Our Advisory Board members play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the AIEJ and manuscripts are peer-reviewed following the procedure outlined below.


Please note that special Issues have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors and/or Advisory Editors. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the Editorial Board.

Initial manuscript evaluation


All new submissions are screened for completeness and adherence to the Guide for Authors. Those that pass are then assigned to a Managing Editor for consideration for sending for peer review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at the initial evaluation stage will normally be informed within 1 week of receipt.

Managing Editor evaluation


When assigned a new submission, the Managing Editor will decide if it warrants peer review or if it should be rejected without review, with final approval by the Editor in Chief. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious conceptual and/or methodological flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will normally be informed within 10 days of assignment to the Managing Editor. Feedback is provided by the Managing Editor for all manuscripts rejected without review and, where possible, suggestions are made on other suitable publication outlets.

 

Those manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review are passed to at least two expert peer reviewers.

Type of peer review


The AIEJ employs a double-blind review, where both the peer reviewer and the author remain anonymous throughout the process.

How the reviewers are selected


Reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise, and our Advisory Board database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for reviewers from authors, though these recommendations may or may not be used.

Reviewer reports


Reviewers are asked to evaluate a manuscript for:

  • originality and significance of contribution

  • interest to social scientists and/or practitioners

  • international relevance

  • coverage of appropriate existing literature

  • adequacy of methodology, analysis and interpretation

  • clear, concise and jargon-free writing style

  • organization


Reviewers are asked to provide anonymous comments to the author and are also given the option of providing confidential comments to the editor. The comments to the author are also made available to other reviewers of the manuscript.

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copy edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer-review process. Minor copy editing will be conducted by the Editorial Board.

How long does the review process take?


Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 80 days. Should the reviewers' reports contradict one another or a report is unduly delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. If necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the initial reviewers, usually within 1 month. Reviewers and Managing Editors may request more than one revision of a manuscript, and alternative reviewers may also be invited to review the manuscript at any time.

The final decision and time to publication


The Editor in Chief is responsible for the decision to reject or recommend the manuscript for publication. This decision will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees.

 

Please note we may forward accepted papers for legal review if appropriate.

 

After acceptance, it currently takes another 4-5 weeks to get the final corrected article online, and a few weeks later this is compiled into an online volume and issue.

Joining the Advisory Board of the AIEJ


If you are not currently a referee on the Advisory Board for the AIEJ but would like to be added to our referee database, please contact us at editors@aiej.org. The benefits of refereeing for the AIEJ include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in the journal. You may also be able to cite your work for the AIEJ as part of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organizations.

© 2020 by the AI Robotics Ethics Society

  • LinkedIn