Review Policies
Editorial Review and Peer Review Policies
The editorial team of AI & Human Sciences Research shall strictly follow the policies and procedures for the editorial and peer review processes of the manuscripts through which it shall be ensured that:
the content of the manuscript is relevant to the aims and scope of AI & Human Sciences Research
the manuscript has produced innovative and quality research at the intersection of AI and human sciences
the format and layout of AI & Human Sciences Research is followed in the manuscript, and
the style, grammar, and language composition used in the manuscript are correct.
Manuscripts not adhering to journal guidelines will be returned to authors without scientific evaluation. The review process is double-blind.
The review policy of AI & Human Sciences Research shall involve editorial review as well as peer review of the manuscripts. If accepted by the editorial team, the manuscript shall be processed for double-blind peer review by relevant experts of international repute from both AI and humanities/social sciences fields. Prior to the approval for publication, a manuscript must be accepted by at least three experts with combined expertise in AI technologies and the relevant human sciences discipline(s). The identity of the author(s) shall be kept secret from the peer-reviewers and vice versa in the peer-review processes. The peer-reviewers may know the identity of the authors only after the publication of the manuscript.
The manuscript submitted to AI & Human Sciences Research shall be handled by editor-in-chief or a section editor who shall be responsible for processing it according to the journal policy and procedure.
The suggestions and comments (if any) shall be shared with the author(s) for revision of the manuscript accordingly.
The editor-in-chief or section editor may consider the revised submission for peer-review processes without changes, ask the author(s) for minor changes or major changes or reject it out-rightly.
Submitted manuscripts will undergo a detailed initial check, including a Plagiarism Check in the Editorial Office. A section Editor or the Editor-in-Chief takes charge of the peer-review process. It starts with a Preliminary Review by the Editor (finished no more than 7-8 days after manuscript submission).
In case the article is considered for the peer-review process, the manuscript shall be forwarded to an assistant editor (sub-editor) for necessary editing and formatting.
The formatted manuscript shall be forwarded for double-blind peer review to at least three experts (subject specialists) of international repute, with at least one expert from the AI field and at least one from the relevant humanities or social sciences discipline.
It shall be ensured that the reviewers are selected according to the expertise relevant to the submitted manuscript's interdisciplinary nature.
The editor-in-chief or section editor shall seek and try to manage to have at least one reviewer from the country or region that is the manuscript's focus, when applicable.
The peer-reviewers shall specifically evaluate the manuscript for the quality of the research based on its relevancy, originality, innovation, and interdisciplinary integration of AI with human sciences.
The author(s) must incorporate all the required changes according to the suggestions and comments of reviewers. In case of difference(s), if any, the author(s) shall record clarification(s) or explanation(s) for each observation or comment of disagreement.
The revised and updated version of the manuscript shall be examined by the editor-in-chief or section editor for validation and verification of the required changes in accordance with the suggestions and comments of the reviewers.
The Editor may request an expert opinion from the editorial adviser(s) for resolving the difference(s) or the conflicting report(s), if any.
The Editor-in-Chief of AI & Human Sciences Research takes the final decision about accepting or rejecting the revised and updated manuscript.
Once the final revision is completed and accepted by Editor-in-Chief, the author will be asked to format the manuscript according to the journal template before it goes into typesetting and proofreading with the publisher. The author will receive the paper in PDF produced by AI & Human Sciences Research for checking before it is published online.
Evaluation Criteria
The peer-reviewers of AI & Human Sciences Research shall carry out the evaluation of an article based on the following 12 principles and standards as a minimum requirement for acceptance of a manuscript:
Title: The title is brief, clear, specific and appropriate to the content/purpose of the article. (Example: Active verbs are used instead of complex noun-based phrases. It is around 10 to 15 words long and summarises the main idea or ideas of the study.)
Abstract: The abstract accurately describes the content of the paper. (Example: It discusses a compact view of the research problem, purpose of study, research design, key findings and is 180-200 words long.)
Keywords: The keywords are enough and appropriate. (Example: It does not use words or phrases from the title and supplement the title's contents. These are descriptive, represent key concepts and nouns, and are 6-8 words.)
Introduction: The introduction gives an overview from a general subject area to a particular topic of inquiry. (Example: It describes the purpose, scope, context, significance, background, hypothesis(es), question(s), brief methodology, outcome(s), and an outline of the remaining structure/organization of the article.)
Literature Review: The literature review gives an overview of the sources explored and demonstrates how the study fits within the larger field of the study. (Example: It gives a description, summary, and critical evaluation of sources explored in relation with the research problem(s) being investigated, addressing literature from both AI and the relevant human sciences disciplines.)
Methodology: The research methodology is adequately described. (Example: It describes the actions taken for investigation of the research problem and the rationale for the application of the specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select, process, and analyze the information applied to understanding the problem.)
Results: Results are clearly presented. (Example: It reports the study findings based upon the methodology(ies) being applied and in a logical sequence without bias or interpretation if data is generated from the author's own research.)
Discussion: The discussion is clear and the findings are accurately analyzed. (Example: It interprets and describes the significance of findings in light of what was already known about the research problem. It explains new understanding or insights emerging based on studying the problem. It is connected to the introduction through research questions or hypothesis(es) and the literature reviewed.)
Interdisciplinary Integration: The manuscript demonstrates meaningful integration of AI concepts/technologies with humanities or social sciences perspectives. (Example: It clearly articulates how AI and human sciences approaches complement each other in addressing the research question, rather than treating them as separate domains.)
Ethical Considerations: The manuscript adequately addresses ethical implications of the research. (Example: It discusses ethical considerations relevant to the intersection of AI with human sciences, such as bias, privacy, human agency, or cultural impact.)
Conclusion: The conclusion is supported by the findings of the results. (Example: It helps the readers to understand why the research should matter to them. It gives a synthesis of key points and, (if applicable), recommends new areas for future research.)
English Language and Style: English language and style meet the standard. (Example: It is clear, unambiguous and objective, i.e., gives reasons and evidence. It uses active voice and a minimum level of passive voice is used where required. Mostly uses ordinary language rather than complicated expressions and technical terminologies.)
