Peer Review Process | Journal of Architectural/Planning Research and Studies (JARS)

The peer review process for JARS is summarized in Figure 1 and described as follows:

Step 1 Submission

The corresponding author submits the manuscript for JARS through the ThaiJO online system to ensure that the manuscript is properly received, processed, and reviewed by editorial team of the journal. This online system facilitates the submission process and helps in keeping contributions organized and consistent for quick review and publication.

Step 2 Initial Check

Prior to sending the submission for full peer review, the editorial management team will conduct similarity, plagiarism, and Generative Artificial Intelligence checks using Crossref and Turnitin. Once the manuscript is determined to be an original submission, the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief will perform a desk review to ensure the manuscript is consistent with journal focus and style. If the manuscript passes the desk review, a formal decision to proceed with peer review will be made and the submission will be assigned to a Section Editor on the editorial board. And even though the manuscript is initially passed the check by Crossref and Turnitin, author(s) will still be requested to sign a declaration form to confirm originality of the work. Additionally, the author(s) may need to submit additional statement and/or supplementary document in regard to the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Technologies, human subjects, and funding. On the other hand, if the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief conclude that the manuscript is deficient in content or style, the manuscript will be returned to the author(s) with a rejection or a revision notification that explains the decision and possible revision and resubmission options. This initial check usually takes 1 week.

Step 3 Assign to a Section Editor

After passing the initial check, the Editor-in-Chief will assign a Section Editor of the manuscript, who will be responsible for identifying appropriate 3 peer reviewers. The Section Editor sends invitations to the 3 peer reviewers, who are experts in fields related to the scope of the submitted manuscript. If responses are not received, further invitations are issued. This process typically takes 2 weeks.

Step 4 Reviewers Conduct Review

Each manuscript will undergo a double-blind peer review with a minimum of 3 reviewers. JARS employs a double-blind peer review process in which neither the reviewers nor the authors are aware of each other's identity. The double-blind peer review process is intended to minimize possible bias from either the selected reviewers (in their reviews) or authors (in their responses to the reviewers as part of revision). The reviewers are instructed to provide full and constructive comments that can meaningfully assist authors to improve their manuscripts and are asked to return their reviews to the Section Editor within 3 weeks.

Step 5 Evaluate the Reviews

The Section Editor will provide a preliminary evaluation of the reviews. Should the Section Editor deem that there is sufficient conflicting opinion in the reviews submitted by the referees, they may seek additional reviews. The Section Editor will synthesize the manuscript reviews and provide a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief of: Reject, Tentatively Accept after Major Revisions, Tentatively Accept after Minor Revisions, Accept in Present Form. This evaluation process generally takes 2 weeks.

Step 6 Deliver Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief will consider the review package, including Section Editor comments and recommendation, and collectively make a final decision of: Reject, Tentatively Accept after Major Revisions, Tentatively Accept after Minor Revisions, Accept in Present Form. This final decision, together with the review package, will be delivered to the corresponding author via an email notification. If the decision is Tentatively Accept after Major Revisions, the authors have 3-4 weeks to submit the revision; whilst, the authors have 2-week period for the revision if the decision is the Tentatively Accept after Minor Revisions.

Step 7 Prepare the Final Version

After the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief accept the manuscript, the proofreading process is applied. After receiving feedbacks from authors, the following processes are copy-edited and formatted for publication. These processes are done by the journal staff. The process usually takes 1-2 weeks.

Step 8 Galley Proof

The formatted article in the form of a galley proof will be sent back to their authors for verification of accuracy. Authors also provide contribution of articles from all co-authors and reporting of human subject at this stage. Subsequently, authors will be instructed that only formatting inaccuracies or typographical errors may be corrected at this stage and no further content revisions will be accepted. After any necessary corrections are made, the corresponding author will return the corrected galley proof to the journal. This procedure typically takes 1 week.

Step 9 Publication of the Manuscript

Once the authors have returned their corrected galley proof, journal staff in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief will finalize formatting, assign the CrossRef DOI, and publish the article on the journal website. This final stage commonly takes 3-4 days.