Peer Review Policy

Review model

JETLG operates a double-anonymised peer review process: the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout. Research articles, short articles, policy analyses and case notes are each reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Book reviews are reviewed by the editorial team.

The process

1. Editorial screening. The editors check fit with the journal’s scope, basic quality and originality, including a similarity check. Manuscripts may be desk-rejected at this stage with brief reasons.
2. Reviewer selection. Reviewers are chosen for subject expertise and independence, drawing on scholars and practitioners from different jurisdictions wherever possible.
3. Review. Reviewers assess originality, contribution to the field, rigour of argument and method, use of sources, clarity and relevance to the governance of emerging technologies.
4. Decision. The editors make the final decision on the basis of reviewer reports: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.
5. Revision. Revised manuscripts are accompanied by a response explaining how each comment has been addressed, and may be returned to the original reviewers.

Timelines

We aim to complete initial screening within two weeks and to communicate a first decision within eight weeks of submission.

Standards for reviewers

• Treat manuscripts as confidential and do not share or use them for personal advantage.
• Declare any conflict of interest and decline to review where one exists.
• Do not upload manuscripts or any part of them to generative AI tools.
• Provide constructive, evidence-based and courteous feedback within the agreed time.

Become a reviewer

We welcome reviewers from all regions and career stages with expertise in technology law, policy, ethics or relevant technical fields. Write to jetlg.journal@gmail.com with your CV, ORCID iD and areas of expertise.