Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA) uses a double-blind peer review model. Under this model, the identity of the authors is concealed from reviewers, and the identity of reviewers is concealed from authors throughout the review process.

The double-blind approach is intended to reduce potential bias associated with institutional affiliation, academic reputation, geographic location, seniority, or other characteristics unrelated to the scientific quality of the manuscript. Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA) applies this model to support a fair, objective, and academically rigorous evaluation process.

• Authors should avoid unnecessary information that directly identifies them within the manuscript.
• Reviewers should not attempt to identify the authors of the manuscript.
• Authors should not attempt to identify the reviewers assigned to their manuscript.
• Reviewers must not disclose their review assignment to third parties.
• Review reports must not contain information that intentionally reveals the reviewer's identity.
• Editorial correspondence relating to the review must remain confidential.

The double-blind model does not remove the requirement for reviewer independence. Reviewers must decline an assignment when a personal, professional, institutional, financial, collaborative, or other relationship could reasonably affect their objectivity. Journal of Decision Support Systems and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (JODESMA) expects all reviewers to disclose potential conflicts of interest and to conduct their assessments impartially and professionally.