The review procedure in the JAIEP journal is double-blind. The editor first determines whether each submission is appropriate for the journal. Papers that are judged appropriate are subsequently normally sent to at least two independent, experienced reviewers who will evaluate the paper's scientific merit. The editor oversees the final determination regarding whether an article will be accepted. The Editor's choice is binding.

More details on different peer review types. The file must be saved in the word processor's native format, such as Word or Latex. One column should be used for the text. Keep the text's formatting as straightforward as you can. Don't hyphenate words or justify text using the word processor's choices, in particular. Use boldface, italics, subscripts, superscripts, etc., though. If you are using a table grid to prepare tables, only use one grid for each table, not one for each row. Use tabs rather than spaces to align columns if there isn't a grid. The preparation of the electronic text should be comparable to that of traditional manuscripts.

The Peer Review and Publication Process in the Journal

1. Submission Process:
• Manuscripts are submitted via the journal's website.
• The initial submission does not need to match the final formatting requirements for publication.
2. Initial Editorial Review:
• The Managing Editor forwards the submitted manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief.
• The Editor-in-Chief nominates members from the editorial and advisory boards to evaluate the manuscript’s originality and ensure it hasn’t been published before.
3. Preliminary Assessment:
   • The manuscript falls within the journal’s scope.
   • The research idea is worthy of publication.
   • The overall quality meets the journal’s standards.
• A confidential review is conducted by the editorial and advisory boards to determine if:
• Manuscripts passing this stage proceed to plagiarism testing.
4. Plagiarism Check:
   • Total plagiarism: Less than 20%.
   • Plagiarism from any single source (including self-plagiarism): Less than 5%.
• A plagiarism check (excluding references) is conducted.
• Acceptable thresholds are:
• Manuscripts exceeding these thresholds are returned to the authors for revision and resubmission as new submissions.
5. Blind Peer Review:
   • Minor Corrections:
   • If only minor corrections are needed, the manuscript is accepted after the authors implement the changes.
   • Major Corrections (First Round):
   • If significant changes are required but the manuscript is not rejected, the authors must address the reviewers' comments and resubmit.
   • The revised manuscript and authors' responses are then sent to the same reviewers for a second evaluation.
   • Major Corrections (Second Round):
   • If major revisions are still required after the second review, the manuscript is rejected.
   • If only minor revisions are required in the second round, the manuscript is accepted after the authors implement the changes.
• An anonymized version of the manuscript (without author information) is sent to two reviewers.
• Reviewers are provided with an evaluation form that includes specific criteria and justification for their recommendations.
• A maximum of two rounds of review is permitted, with three possible outcomes:
6. Final Approval and Formatting:
   • Language editing.
   • Formatting in the journal's final layout.
• Accepted manuscripts are sent to the publisher for:
• The formatted version is sent to the authors for final review of any minor adjustments and to confirm corrections.
• Authors are given one week to respond; extensions can be requested if needed.
• If no response is received after three reminders, the manuscript proceeds to publication without further author input.
7. Publication Costs:
• Authors are informed of the publication fees, which are collected according to the financial policies of the Scientific Society for Applied Studies and Research.
8. Invited Submissions:
• The advisory board may invite prominent specialists in the journal's fields to submit research.
• Invited submissions are subjected to the same peer review process as regular submissions.