advances.in/psychology implements a transparent (open) double-blind peer review process. After editorial review, each paper undergoes evaluation by two reviewers—ideally, one specialized in the field of the submission and the other from a different field. This ensures that successful submissions not only advance the state of the art but also remain relevant and accessible to a wider audience. Previously, for a small selection of articles in a special issue focused on highly specialized network psychometric methods, one reviewer and an editor specialized in the paper’s topic were asked to evaluate the manuscript. In such cases, the editor-in-chief retained the final decision to ensure independent oversight. This practice is no longer active, and editors do not act as reviewers for the manuscripts they handle.
In the spirit of transparency, the anonymous reviews are published as a report alongside the accepted article. We rely on the evaluations provided by our editorial board members and external reviewers.
The decision to publish a manuscript rests with the editor, who carefully considers the evaluations provided by the reviewers before making a determination.