Peer Review Policy

ASAS uses double-blind peer review. Author and reviewer identities are concealed from one another during review.

Editorial screening

An editor first checks scope, originality, clarity, research integrity, data reporting and whether the evidence is sufficient for specialist review. A manuscript may be declined at this stage if it is outside scope or substantially incomplete.

External review

Suitable manuscripts are normally assessed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant scientific or technical expertise. Reviewers consider the question, method, calibration, uncertainty, reproducibility, interpretation, contribution and presentation.

Decision and revision

Decisions may be accept, minor revision, major revision or reject. Authors should answer each comment and identify changes. Revision does not guarantee acceptance. The editor makes the final decision and may seek further review.

Confidentiality and conflicts

Editors and reviewers must keep manuscripts confidential, declare conflicts and avoid using unpublished results. Authors may appeal by identifying a specific factual or procedural error.