Peer Review

Review policy

JRISA uses a double-anonymized peer-review process for scholarly manuscripts. The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors.

Editorial screening

Manuscripts first undergo editorial screening. Initial screening may consider fit with the journal’s scope, completeness, basic academic structure, citation integrity, ethical requirements, potential plagiarism or duplicate publication, and whether the manuscript is sufficiently developed for external review.

A manuscript may be declined during editorial screening when substantial problems prevent meaningful peer review.

Reviewers

Manuscripts proceeding to external review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic or professional expertise.

The journal may use faculty members, researchers, postdoctoral scholars, doctoral researchers, advanced doctoral candidates, or qualified professionals as reviewers when they have appropriate subject knowledge.

Review criteria

Peer review criteria
Criterion	Question the reviewer answers
Research Purpose	Is the purpose, research question, argument, or objective clear?
Engagement With Literature	Does the manuscript engage meaningfully with relevant scholarship?
Methods or Analytical Approach	Are the methods or analytical approach appropriate for the stated purpose?
Evidence	Are claims supported by appropriate evidence?
Interpretation	Are conclusions reasonably supported by the research or analysis?
Transparency	Are limitations, procedures, and relevant decisions described honestly?
Academic Integrity	Are citations appropriate and are there apparent concerns involving plagiarism, fabricated evidence, or misleading reporting?
Communication	Is the manuscript sufficiently clear and organized for readers to understand the work?
Scholarly Value	Does the manuscript provide a meaningful contribution to inquiry, learning, synthesis, replication, exploration, application, or scholarly discussion?

Novelty standard

JRISA does not require every manuscript to demonstrate groundbreaking theoretical or empirical novelty. Exploratory studies, small-scale research, replication studies, secondary analyses, focused reviews, null findings, case studies, and early-stage scholarly projects may be appropriate for publication when they are responsibly conducted, clearly presented, and academically meaningful.

Developmental review

Peer review at JRISA is intended to be both evaluative and developmental. Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve clarity, methodology, interpretation, literature engagement, and presentation. Developmental review does not mean that all manuscripts will ultimately be accepted. JRISA does not guarantee manuscript acceptance or publication.

Review timeline

Review timelines vary depending on manuscript topic, reviewer availability, and the extent of revision required. JRISA seeks to communicate editorial decisions in a timely manner but does not guarantee a fixed review or publication timeline.