Peer Review Process
SESSION applies a double-blind peer-review process. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. Every research manuscript that passes editorial screening is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.
1. Editorial Screening
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor conducts an initial screening to assess the manuscript's fit with the journal's focus and scope, completeness, compliance with the Author Guidelines, ethical declarations, anonymization, and overall scholarly quality. The manuscript is also checked using a similarity-detection tool. Similarity reports are interpreted editorially based on the nature and extent of the overlap; a numerical score alone does not determine the decision. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for correction or rejected before peer review.
2. Reviewer Selection and Qualifications
Each manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers whose expertise matches the subject of the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on relevant scholarly competence, an active publication record, and their ability to provide a substantive and timely assessment. The journal seeks reviewers from diverse institutions and, where appropriate, countries. Reviewers must have no personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflict of interest with the authors or the work. A reviewer who identifies a conflict must decline the assignment.
3. Review Criteria
Reviewers are asked to provide substantive, constructive, and evidence-based comments addressing:
- relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
- originality, novelty, and contribution to knowledge or practice;
- clarity of the research problem, objectives, and research gap;
- appropriateness and reproducibility of the methods;
- quality, sufficiency, and integrity of the data;
- appropriateness of the analysis and interpretation;
- consistency between results, discussion, and conclusions;
- research ethics, data availability, and conflicts of interest, where applicable;
- relevance, currency, and accuracy of the references; and
- clarity and quality of the manuscript, tables, figures, and other supporting materials.
4. Review Timeline
The journal aims to complete the review and editorial decision process within 30-60 days. The actual duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the number of revision rounds required. Reviewers who cannot complete the review within the requested period should promptly inform the editor.
5. Revision and Re-review
Authors must respond to every reviewer and editor comment in a point-by-point response and submit a clearly revised manuscript. Major revisions are normally returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation when possible. Minor revisions may be assessed by the handling editor. Failure to address substantive concerns adequately may result in rejection.
6. Editorial Decision
Possible decisions are Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. When reviewer recommendations conflict substantially, the editor may invite an additional independent reviewer. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the authorized handling editor based on the manuscript's academic merit, the reviewers' evidence-based comments, the authors' responses, and compliance with publication ethics. Acceptance is never guaranteed, and editorial decisions are independent of improper institutional, commercial, sponsor, or personal influence.
7. Confidentiality, Conflicts of Interest, and Artificial Intelligence
Manuscripts, review reports, and related correspondence are confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, reproduce, or use unpublished material for personal advantage. Reviewers are prohibited from using artificial intelligence tools in the peer-review process, including to analyze or evaluate a manuscript, draft review comments, or enter/upload the manuscript or any part of it into an AI application. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, confidentiality, and integrity of their assessments.
8. Publication
Manuscripts accepted after peer review proceed to copyediting, production, and author proofreading before publication. Published articles are made openly and permanently available in accordance with the journal's open-access and licensing policies.
