Peer Review Policy

The Scientific Journal of the Academy of National Security is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, transparent, and academically sound peer-review process. Peer review is used to evaluate the scholarly quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and overall contribution of manuscripts submitted to the journal. The process is intended to support high standards of academic publishing while providing authors with constructive feedback that can improve the quality and clarity of their work.

All submitted manuscripts are first subject to an initial editorial assessment. The editorial team evaluates each submission for its relevance to the journal's scope, originality, academic quality, basic structural and ethical requirements, and suitability for further consideration. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's scope or fundamental submission requirements may be declined at this stage without external peer review.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the preliminary editorial assessment are normally sent to qualified independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic or professional expertise, research experience, and ability to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Wherever possible, reviewers who have a potential conflict of interest with the authors or the research are avoided.

The journal generally follows a double-blind peer-review approach, under which the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to one another during the review process. Authors should therefore remove unnecessary identifying information from the manuscript where required. Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and independently, without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, academic status, or other personal characteristics.

Reviewers are asked to assess the originality and significance of the research, clarity of objectives and research questions, adequacy of the literature review, appropriateness of methodology, quality of analysis, validity of conclusions, organization and presentation, accuracy of references, and overall contribution to the field of national security and related disciplines. Reviewers may recommend acceptance, acceptance subject to minor revisions, major revision and resubmission, or rejection. The final editorial decision is not determined solely by an individual reviewer's recommendation.

Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts should address the reviewers' recommendations carefully and provide a clear response explaining how substantive concerns have been addressed. Where authors disagree with a reviewer comment, they should provide a reasoned academic explanation. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editors as appropriate.

The editorial team retains responsibility for the final publication decision. Decisions are based on the overall scholarly quality of the manuscript, reviewer assessments, relevance to the journal, ethical considerations, originality, and potential contribution to academic knowledge. In cases where reviewer recommendations substantially differ, the editors may seek an additional review or undertake further editorial assessment before reaching a decision.

Reviewers are required to maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process. Manuscripts and associated materials should not be copied, shared, discussed with unauthorized individuals, or used for personal research or other purposes before publication. Reviewers should promptly inform the editorial office if they identify a conflict of interest or believe that they are unable to provide an impartial assessment.

The journal expects reviewers to provide professional, respectful, evidence-based, and constructive comments. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should identify relevant published work where necessary and should notify the editors of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, manipulated findings, or other forms of academic misconduct that come to their attention during the review.

Editors also maintain confidentiality and impartiality throughout the editorial process. Editors should not participate in decisions concerning manuscripts where they have a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest. Editorial decisions should be based on scholarly considerations rather than commercial, political, institutional, or personal interests.

The journal recognizes that peer review is an essential part of maintaining the reliability and integrity of scholarly communication. Accordingly, the editorial office may monitor the quality and timeliness of reviews and may replace reviewers where necessary. The journal may also take appropriate action when concerns arise regarding reviewer conduct, conflicts of interest, confidentiality, or research integrity.

Through this peer-review policy, the Scientific Journal of the Academy of National Security seeks to ensure that published research meets appropriate standards of academic rigor, integrity, relevance, and scholarly contribution while promoting a fair and constructive experience for authors and reviewers.