Peer Review Process

Archipelagic Studies in Language, Literature, and Education (ASLLE) applies a double-anonymous peer review process to research articles submitted for publication. The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

Editorial Screening

Every manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to determine its conformity with the journal's aims and scope, scholarly relevance, originality, basic methodological or theoretical adequacy, ethical requirements, and compliance with the journal's submission guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these preliminary requirements may be declined without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening may also be examined using similarity-detection tools. Similarity reports are interpreted by editors and are not used as the sole basis for an editorial decision.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass editorial screening are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area. Reviewers should not have conflicts of interest that could compromise the independence or objectivity of their assessment.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript's scholarly contribution, relevance to the journal's scope, conceptual or theoretical grounding, appropriateness of the research design and methodology where applicable, quality of analysis and interpretation, clarity of presentation, engagement with relevant literature, originality, research integrity, and significance of the conclusions.

Reviewer Confidentiality and Independence

Manuscripts submitted for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, reproduce, or use unpublished material contained in a manuscript for personal advantage. Reviewers are expected to disclose any potential conflict of interest and decline the review when impartial assessment cannot reasonably be maintained.

Editorial Decision

Reviewer reports serve as scholarly advice to the editorial team. The final decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized handling editor and is based on the manuscript's scholarly quality, the reviewers' evaluations, the authors' responses to requested revisions, adherence to publication ethics, and relevance to the journal.

Editorial decisions may include:

• Accept;
• Minor Revision;
• Major Revision;
• Resubmit for Review; or
• Reject.

Acceptance is never guaranteed solely because a manuscript has completed peer review.

Revision

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to respond systematically to reviewer and editor comments and to provide a revised manuscript together with an explanation of the changes made. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated further by the editor depending on the nature and extent of the revision.

Additional rounds of review may be conducted when necessary to ensure that substantive concerns have been adequately addressed.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose relationships or circumstances that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their judgment. Where a conflict exists, the manuscript will be reassigned whenever necessary to maintain editorial independence.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or persons closely associated with the journal will be handled through an independent editorial and peer-review process in which the submitting individual has no role in the assessment or decision.

Special Issues and Thematic Collections

Articles submitted to special issues or thematic collections are subject to the same standards of editorial assessment and independent peer review as regular submissions. Guest editors, when appointed, operate under the supervision of the journal's editorial leadership. Manuscripts authored by guest editors or persons responsible for a special issue must be handled independently.

Research Integrity

The peer-review process is conducted in conjunction with the journal's policies on publication ethics, plagiarism and research misconduct, conflicts of interest, use of generative artificial intelligence, research data, corrections, retractions, and other matters concerning the integrity of the scholarly record.

Final Responsibility

Peer review is an essential component of ASLLE's quality-control process; however, reviewer recommendations do not constitute automatic editorial decisions. The journal retains responsibility for the integrity, transparency, fairness, and independence of the editorial process.