Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA) applies a formal peer review policy to maintain the academic quality, scientific integrity, and relevance of published manuscripts. Peer review is an essential part of the editorial process and provides an independent academic assessment of the manuscript before an editorial decision is made.

All manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are considered for peer review. The review process evaluates the manuscript from scientific, methodological, technical, ethical, and presentation perspectives. The review should help determine whether the manuscript provides a valid and meaningful contribution to the field addressed by Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA).

• Peer review must be conducted fairly, objectively, and independently.
• Reviewers must have appropriate expertise relevant to the manuscript.
• Reviewers must evaluate the manuscript based on its content rather than the identity, affiliation, reputation, or status of the authors.
• Reviewer comments must be professional, constructive, specific, and academically justified.
• All manuscripts and review materials must be treated as confidential.
• Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed before the review is undertaken.
• Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained during the review for personal or professional purposes.
• Authors must be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive reviewer comments.
• The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the Editor of Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA).