Peer Review Process and AI Use Policy

Journal of Pragmatics Research (JOPR) maintains a Double-Blind Peer Review policy to ensure objectivity, transparency, and academic integrity in the publication process.

All research articles published in JOPR undergo a double-blind peer review, the key characteristics of which are outlined below:

  • Double-blind peer review is a process used in academic publishing to ensure impartiality and prevent bias. In this method, both the author and the reviewer remain anonymous to each other. Identifying information is removed from the manuscript before it is sent to reviewers, so that the reviewer does not know the author’s identity, and vice versa.

  • The process begins when an author submits a manuscript. The editor first evaluates its suitability for the journal and then assigns qualified reviewers. The editor maintains confidentiality throughout the review process. Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations, which are returned to the author for revision. This process may be repeated until the paper meets the journal’s publication standards.

  • The goal of double-blind peer review is to minimize potential bias and promote fairness. This system prevents conflicts of interest and ensures that manuscripts are judged solely on academic merit, not on the author’s identity, institution, or reputation.

  • Despite some limitations, double-blind peer review remains a cornerstone of JOPR’s editorial policy, ensuring that every published article upholds rigorous academic and ethical standards.

Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

In alignment with JOPR’s Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the publication process is regulated as follows:

  • For Authors: AI tools may be used only as assistive instruments—for example, to improve language clarity, grammar, or formatting. However, AI must not be used to generate, fabricate, or manipulate research data, analysis, or references. Authors must disclose any significant use of AI tools in the methodology or acknowledgments section.

  • For Editors: Editors may use AI-based tools to support technical or administrative tasks, such as plagiarism detection, reference checking, and manuscript screening. However, all editorial judgments and final publication decisions must remain entirely human-driven.

  • For Reviewers: Reviewers may use AI only to support comprehension (e.g., grammar checking or citation verification) but must not rely on AI systems to form review opinions or recommendations. The integrity and confidentiality of the peer review process must be maintained at all times.

This policy ensures that AI serves as a supporting tool rather than a decision-making entity, preserving human accountability, academic integrity, and ethical responsibility throughout the publication process.

References

[1] https://www.conference2go.com/blog/what-is-double-blind-peer-review-and-how-does-it-work/
[2] https://www.enago.com/academy/double-blind-peer-review-for-better-or-for-worse/
[3] https://penelitian.staisw.ac.id/index.php/KLWJPM/ABOUT
[4] https://fourwaves.com/blog/single-double-blind-peer-review/
[5] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26273735/
[6] https://ejournal.uinsalatiga.ac.id/index.php/jopr/joprpubethics