Peer Review Process

Asean Journal of Self and Psychological Measurement (AJSPM) is a peer-reviewed journal published triannually. AJSPM applies a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. The journal is committed to a fair, objective, and timely evaluation of manuscripts within its focus and scope: psychometrics, experimental psychology, developmental psychology, and educational psychology.

 

  • Review Stages
  1. Initial Editorial Screening

Each submission is screened by the editor/editorial office to ensure it fits the journal’s focus and scope, meets basic quality and formatting requirements, and includes necessary statements (e.g., ethical clearance and informed consent when human participants are involved). Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be desk-rejected or returned for correction prior to review.

  1. Similarity Check

AJSPM may conduct a similarity/plagiarism screening. Manuscripts with suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical publication practices may be rejected or investigated in line with the journal’s publication ethics.

  1. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to a handling editor and sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

  1. Peer Review

Reviewers evaluate the manuscripts objectively and provide constructive recommendations. Review criteria typically include scholarly contribution, methodological rigor, clarity of reporting, appropriateness of analysis, and strength of interpretation. For the psychometrics and measurement paper, reviewers may also assess the quality of instruments and evidence supporting measurement validity and reliability (as applicable to the study design and method used).

  1. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports and the handling editor’s assessment, the editorial decision may be: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Authors requested to revise must submit a revised manuscript together with a structured response to reviewers’ and editors’ comments. Revised manuscripts may be re-reviewed when necessary.

  1. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

All submitted manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers and editors must not use unpublished information from a submission for personal advantage. Reviewers and editors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest; where a conflict exists, an alternative reviewer/editor will be appointed.

  1. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit an appeal in writing if they believe a decision was based on a substantive misunderstanding of the work or a procedural issue. Appeals are considered objectively by the Editor-in-Chief and, where appropriate, may involve additional reviews.