IJAMS

Peer Review Policy

IJAMS is a refereed journal. All articles published in the journal are evaluated through double-blind peer review: the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.

The Review Process

1. Editorial screening

   The Editors first check that the manuscript falls within the aims and scope of the journal, complies with the submission guidelines, and has been anonymised for review. Manuscripts may be returned to the authors without external review at this stage.

2. Double-blind review

   The manuscript is reviewed anonymously by independent referees selected by the Editors for their expertise in the subject of the paper. Referees assess the originality, academic rigour, and relevance of the work and provide a reasoned recommendation.

3. Editorial decision

   On the basis of the referee reports, the Editors decide to accept the manuscript, to request minor or major revision, or to reject it. Revised manuscripts may be sent for further review, and the decision is communicated to the authors together with the referees' comments.

4. Publication

   Accepted articles are prepared for publication and released on J-STAGE with a DOI.

Reviewer Conduct

Referees treat manuscripts as confidential documents, review them objectively with clearly formulated and supported observations, and decline to review where a conflict of interest exists. The responsibilities of reviewers, editors, and authors in the review process are set out in full in the journal's publication ethics.

Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding of their work may appeal to the editorial office at ijams@jams-web.jp. Appeals are considered by the Editors as described in the publication ethics.