Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to POSTech Journal: Politic, Society and Technology Journal undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and relevance of the submissions.

1. Initial Screening

  • Upon submission, the manuscript will be reviewed by the editorial team to ensure it meets the journal’s scope, formatting guidelines, and ethical standards.

  • Manuscripts that do not comply will be returned to the authors for correction or may be rejected without review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be sent to at least two independent reviewers.

  • The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process (double-blind).

  • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject matter.

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge

  • Clarity of research questions and objectives

  • Soundness of methodology

  • Quality and depth of analysis

  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope

  • Clarity of presentation and writing

  • Appropriateness of references and citations

4. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial team will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Accept with minor revisions

  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions)

  • Reject

Authors will be notified of the decision along with reviewers’ comments to guide necessary revisions. In cases of major revision, a second round of review may be required.

5. Revision and Final Decision

  • Authors are expected to submit revised manuscripts within the given time frame.

  • A revised manuscript may be sent back to the same reviewers or assessed by the editor.

  • The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

6. Ethical Considerations

  • Reviewers are expected to declare any conflict of interest and maintain confidentiality.

  • Any detected case of plagiarism, data fabrication, or other ethical misconduct will result in immediate rejection and possible sanctions.

Typical Timeline:

  • Initial editorial screening: 5–7 days

  • Peer review process: 4–6 weeks

  • Final decision: Within 8 weeks (on average)