Peer Review Policy

Innovations in Science, Technology, and Society (ISTS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality, integrity, and objectivity in its publishing process. All manuscripts submitted to ISTS undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure that scholarly work is evaluated fairly and without bias.

1. Review Model

  • Double-Blind Review: Both the authors’ identities are concealed from reviewers, and reviewers’ identities are concealed from authors.

  • This approach minimizes bias based on gender, institutional affiliation, geographic origin, or prior reputation.

2. Review Process

  1. Initial Editorial Screening

    • Manuscripts are first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to ensure they fit the journal’s scope, adhere to submission guidelines, and meet basic quality and ethical standards.

    • Submissions failing to meet these requirements may be desk-rejected without external review.

  2. Reviewer Selection

    • At least two independent experts in the relevant field are invited to review each manuscript.

    • Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, prior reviewing experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.

  3. Evaluation Criteria
    Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:

    • Originality and significance of the research

    • Soundness and rigor of methodology

    • Clarity and coherence of presentation

    • Validity of results and conclusions

    • Relevance to the journal’s scope and readership

    • Adherence to ethical standards

  4. Reviewer Recommendations
    Reviewers may recommend one of the following:

    • Accept as is

    • Minor revisions

    • Major revisions and resubmission

    • Reject

  5. Editorial Decision

    • The final decision (acceptance, revision, or rejection) is made by the Editor-in-Chief, considering reviewers’ reports and the manuscript’s overall contribution.

    • Decisions are communicated to authors along with anonymized reviewer comments.

3. Timelines

  • ISTS aims to complete the initial review process within 4–6 weeks of submission.

  • Revised manuscripts are usually re-evaluated within 2–3 weeks.

4. Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

  • Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.

  • They must provide objective, constructive feedback and avoid personal criticism.

  • Any conflict of interest must be declared immediately to the editor.

  • Reviewers should recuse themselves if they feel unqualified or unable to review the work impartially.

5. Appeals and Complaints

  • Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe the review process was flawed.

  • Appeals must be submitted in writing, with specific justifications, to the editorial office.

  • The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may seek additional opinions before making a final decision.

6. Post-Publication Review

  • The journal welcomes scholarly discussion and post-publication commentary.

  • If errors or ethical issues are identified post-publication, the editorial team will investigate and may issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern as necessary.

Through this transparent and rigorous peer review policy, ISTS aims to ensure the credibility, quality, and scholarly value of all published works.