Editorial Process

All submissions shall be made through the PJAAI’s Open Journal System platform.  

Only submissions that are in scope and have passed preliminary screening for completeness and documentary requirements shall be considered by the Editor-in-Chief if these may proceed to review. Once reviewed to be complete, manuscript will undergo similarity check. 

An Associate Editor shall be assigned by the Editor-in-Chief to oversee and facilitate the peer review process.  Based on the recommendations of the Associate Editor after peer review, the Editor-in-Chief shall make the final decision on the manuscript.

The PJAAI implements a double-blind peer review policy (i.e., both the author and reviewer are anonymous). The Associate Editor shall send the manuscript to two (2) peer reviewers simultaneously.  A third reviewer may be asked if the first two reviews have differing or opposing recommendations.  Additional reviewers may be invited depending on the judgment of the Associate Editor. 

For manuscripts that undergo 1 round of peer review, authors can expect an editorial decision within sixty (60) calendar days.  Should peer reviews and editorial deliberations take longer, the Editorial coordinator shall update the authors accordingly. 

Editorial decisions may be one of the following:

  • (1) Acceptance without further revision,
  • (2) Acceptance with minor revisions required,
  • (3) Acceptance with major revisions required, or
  • (4) Manuscript rejection

All accepted manuscripts are subject to formatting and edits to conform with the journal’s style guide and branding.

Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

In accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), all submitted manuscripts undergo similarity screening as part of the editorial review process. Similarity checks are conducted by the editors using plagiarism detection software, Turnitin, to identify potential plagiarism, redundant publication or improper citation.

Manuscripts with unacceptable levels of similarity or evidence of unethical publication practices may be rejected, returned to authors for clarification or revision, or handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and the journal’s editorial policies.