Peer Review and Open Science Policy

Peer Review and Open Science Policy

Transparency, Research Integrity, and Editorial Quality

The International Journal of Artificial Intelligence, Educational Technologies and Teacher Education – IJAIET adopts a peer-review process based on the principles of scientific quality, editorial independence, impartiality, confidentiality, transparency, research integrity, and Open Science.

Peer review is one of the primary mechanisms for ensuring and improving the quality of manuscripts published by IJAIET. The process seeks to ensure that manuscripts demonstrate originality, scientific relevance, theoretical and methodological rigor, consistency of results, ethical compliance, and an effective contribution to the advancement of knowledge.

Given the journal's international and interdisciplinary nature, reviewers are selected according to their scientific expertise, academic experience, and suitability for the subject and/or methodology of the manuscript. Whenever possible, IJAIET seeks institutional, disciplinary, and geographical diversity among reviewers.

1. Concept of Peer Review

Peer review is the process through which a scientific manuscript is critically evaluated by researchers or specialists with recognized expertise in the subject area or methodology related to the work.

At IJAIET, peer review aims to:

  • ensure the scientific quality and reliability of published research;
  • assess the originality and relevance of the study;
  • verify theoretical and methodological consistency;
  • assess the quality and coherence of results and conclusions;
  • identify issues related to ethics and research integrity;
  • contribute constructively to improving manuscripts;
  • independently support the editorial decision-making process.

Reviewers' reports constitute scientific and technical recommendations. The final decision regarding a manuscript rests with the Editors, who consider the reviewers' reports, editorial policies, research integrity requirements, and the scientific interests of the journal.

2. Peer-Review Models

IJAIET may use different peer-review models according to the nature of the manuscript, characteristics of the research, and principles of Open Science.

2.1. Double-Blind Peer Review

Double-blind peer review is the predominant model for scientific manuscripts submitted to IJAIET.

Under this model:

  • authors do not know the identity of the reviewers;
  • reviewers do not know the identity of the authors;
  • manuscripts must be prepared and submitted to reviewers in anonymized form;
  • information that may directly reveal authorship must be removed from the version submitted for review;
  • reviews must be supported by scientific, methodological, technical, and ethical reasoning.

Double-blind review seeks to reduce potential biases associated with authorship, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, academic prestige, or other characteristics unrelated to the scientific quality of the manuscript.

It is particularly applicable to original scientific articles, research articles, empirical and theoretical studies, systematic reviews, integrative reviews, scoping reviews, meta-analyses, and scientific essays.

3. Single-Blind Peer Review

Under single-blind peer review:

  • reviewers know the identity of the authors;
  • authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

This model may be used when the characteristics of the manuscript make anonymization impracticable or when knowledge of the institutional, professional, or scientific context is relevant to an appropriate assessment.

It may be applied to case studies, experience reports, highly contextualized research, institutional studies, technical documents, Short Communications, and studies whose methodology or object makes authorship readily identifiable.

The use of this model does not reduce the requirements for independence, impartiality, scientific rigor, and disclosure of conflicts of interest.

4. Open Peer Review

In accordance with the principles of Open Science, IJAIET may adopt Open Peer Review, subject to the conditions established by the journal and the consent of the parties involved.

Openness may occur at different levels.

4.1. Open Identities

Authors and reviewers may know each other's identities during the review process when there is consent.

4.2. Open Reports

Peer-review reports may be published alongside the final article, subject to authorization and IJAIET's editorial policy.

Reviewers may choose between:

  • an identified open review report; or
  • an anonymous open review report.

Publication of a review report does not necessarily require disclosure of the reviewer's identity.

4.3. Open Editorial History

When an open model is adopted and under the conditions established by the journal, the following may accompany the published article:

  • peer-review reports;
  • reports from different rounds of review;
  • authors' responses to reviewers;
  • revision letters;
  • submission dates;
  • revision dates;
  • acceptance date;
  • other relevant information concerning the editorial process.

This practice strengthens traceability, transparency, and accountability in scholarly communication.

5. Open Science

Concept

Open Science encompasses practices aimed at making the production, evaluation, and communication of scientific knowledge more open, accessible, transparent, collaborative, and verifiable.

At IJAIET, Open Science extends beyond free access to published articles and encompasses different dimensions of the research and scholarly communication lifecycle.

The journal encourages:

  • immediate Open Access to published articles;
  • use of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International – CC BY 4.0 license;
  • deposition of preprints;
  • responsible sharing of research data;
  • availability of codes, instruments, protocols, and research materials, when applicable;
  • adoption of a Data Availability Statement;
  • methodological transparency;
  • responsible openness of peer review;
  • publication of review reports, when authorized;
  • transparency of editorial history;
  • identification of individual author contributions;
  • adoption of the CRediT Taxonomy;
  • use of persistent identifiers such as ORCID and DOI;
  • practices supporting research reproducibility and verifiability.

6. General Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to IJAIET generally undergo the following stages:

6.1. Submission

The manuscript and all required documents are submitted through the journal's editorial platform.

6.2. Editorial Screening – Desk Review

The Editorial Team conducts a preliminary assessment considering:

  • compliance with the journal's focus and scope;
  • originality;
  • initial scientific quality;
  • manuscript structure;
  • compliance with the Guidelines for Authors;
  • required documentation;
  • ethical aspects;
  • editorial requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's minimum requirements may be rejected at this stage.

6.3. Originality, Similarity, and Research Integrity Screening

Manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection tools and other research-integrity procedures.

Similarity findings are assessed qualitatively, considering their nature, extent, location, and scientific justification. IJAIET does not rely exclusively on an automatic percentage threshold as a criterion for editorial decisions.

6.4. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts approved at the editorial screening stage are normally sent to at least two reviewers with scientific expertise relevant to the subject and/or methodology of the research.

Whenever possible, reviewers will be external and independent of the authors and their institutions.

6.5. Scientific Review

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide a reasoned recommendation.

6.6. Revisions

Authors may be required to revise the manuscript and, when requested, submit a structured response to reviewers, identifying the changes made or providing scientific justification for recommendations not incorporated.

Additional rounds of peer review may be conducted when necessary.

6.7. Editorial Decision

Editorial decisions may include:

  • Accept;
  • Accept with corrections;
  • Minor revisions;
  • Major revisions / new round of review;
  • Reject.

The final decision rests with the Editorial Team.

6.8. Editorial Production and Publication

Following final acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to editorial preparation, language revision, standardization, preparation of language versions, typesetting, DOI assignment, and publication.

7. Scientific Evaluation Criteria

Depending on the type of manuscript, reviewers should consider:

  • compliance with IJAIET's focus and scope;
  • originality;
  • scientific and social relevance;
  • timeliness of the research problem;
  • clarity of objectives;
  • consistency of the theoretical framework;
  • methodological appropriateness;
  • transparency of research procedures;
  • quality of data presentation and analysis;
  • coherence among objectives, methods, results, and conclusions;
  • quality and currency of references;
  • limitations of the study;
  • contribution to the advancement of knowledge;
  • ethical considerations;
  • research integrity;
  • transparency regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence, when applicable.

Reviews must be objective, evidence-based, respectful, and constructive.

Reports containing personal attacks, discrimination, offensive language, undeclared conflicts of interest, or assessments based on criteria unrelated to scientific quality will not be accepted.

8. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers, editors, and authors must disclose situations that may constitute actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

Reviewers must decline an invitation when circumstances could compromise their independence or impartiality, including relevant personal, professional, institutional, academic, or financial relationships with the authors or the research under review.

Editors must adopt procedures to prevent conflicts of interest from influencing editorial decisions.

9. Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents until publication or legitimate public disclosure by the authors.

Reviewers must not:

  • share manuscripts with third parties without authorization;
  • use unpublished data, results, methods, or ideas for personal benefit;
  • disclose confidential information obtained during the review process;
  • use manuscript content before publication;
  • delegate the review to another person without editorial authorization.

Under double-blind review, identities must be protected throughout the process.

Under Open Peer Review, any disclosure of identity must comply with IJAIET's established conditions and require the consent of the parties involved.

10. Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review

Given IJAIET's scientific field and its commitment to research integrity, confidentiality, data protection, and human responsibility, the use of Artificial Intelligence in peer review requires specific safeguards.

Reviewers must not upload, copy, enter, or otherwise provide submitted manuscripts, unpublished data, confidential documents, or protected information to public or external Generative Artificial Intelligence systems when doing so may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, authors' rights, or data protection.

Artificial Intelligence does not replace human scientific judgment and cannot be considered an author or responsible party for a peer-review report.

Where AI tools are expressly permitted to support activities related to peer review, their use must comply with:

  • confidentiality;
  • data protection;
  • transparency;
  • information security;
  • human oversight;
  • verification of AI-generated information;
  • full responsibility of the reviewer for the final report.

The reviewer remains fully responsible for the scientific assessment, recommendations, accuracy, and integrity of the review report.

11. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

  • maintain confidentiality;
  • disclose conflicts of interest;
  • evaluate manuscripts impartially and independently;
  • provide well-founded reports;
  • comply with established deadlines;
  • report suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other forms of misconduct;
  • treat authors and their work respectfully;
  • refrain from using privileged information;
  • comply with IJAIET's research integrity and Open Science policies;
  • assume full responsibility for the review submitted.

12. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must:

  • submit original work;
  • respond appropriately to reviewers' and editors' requests;
  • clearly indicate revisions made;
  • disclose conflicts of interest;
  • comply with research ethics principles;
  • ensure the integrity and authenticity of data;
  • disclose funding and sources of support;
  • declare the use of Artificial Intelligence when required by journal policies;
  • correct errors identified during the editorial process;
  • comply with the principles of transparency and research integrity.

13. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring:

  • editorial independence;
  • appropriate reviewer selection;
  • management of conflicts of interest;
  • confidentiality;
  • impartial treatment of manuscripts;
  • transparency in editorial decision-making;
  • investigation of allegations of misconduct;
  • compliance with Open Science policies;
  • protection of authors and reviewers;
  • reasoned editorial decisions.

Publication decisions must be based on the scientific merit of the work, independently of commercial, institutional, personal, or financial interests.

14. Independence Between Peer Review and Publication Charges

Scientific evaluation is independent of any payment related to editorial processing or publication.

Payment of applicable charges does not guarantee acceptance, approval, or publication and does not influence reviewers or editorial decisions.

Decisions are based exclusively on scientific, ethical, and editorial criteria.

15. IJAIET's Commitment

IJAIET considers peer review an essential scientific activity, rather than a mere administrative formality.

Its Peer Review and Open Science Policy seeks to strengthen:

  • scientific quality;
  • methodological rigor;
  • editorial independence;
  • ethics and research integrity;
  • transparency;
  • traceability of the editorial process;
  • accountability of all participants in scholarly communication;
  • responsible openness of science;
  • internationalization;
  • public trust in scientific research.

By integrating peer review, Open Science, Open Access, editorial transparency, human responsibility in the use of Artificial Intelligence, and protection of confidentiality, IJAIET reaffirms its commitment to international scholarly communication that is ethical, reliable, inclusive, transparent, and quality-driven.

The Editors