Submission check
The editorial office confirms that required files are complete and that identifying information has been removed from the manuscript intended for review.
Xavier Ateneo Graduate JournalMultidisciplinary Journal of Scholarly Research and Discourse
ISSN 3082-5806Annual · Peer reviewed
Peer review and editorial decisions
A fair process designed to strengthen scholarship.
XAGJ uses double-blind peer review. Each eligible manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers, while the volume editor remains responsible for the final editorial decision.
Double-blindAuthor and reviewer identities are concealed.
At least two reviewersIndependent specialists assess each eligible manuscript.
Approximately eight weeksExpected feedback period, subject to availability and complexity.
Editor-led decisionReviews advise; the volume editor makes the final decision.
Eight stages
From manuscript to published paper
Editorial screening
The volume editor and editorial team consider scope, originality, ethical compliance, scholarly contribution, presentation, and readiness for external assessment.
Reviewer selection
At least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject or methodological expertise are invited. Conflicts of interest are considered before assignments are confirmed.
Double-blind evaluation
Authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another. Reviewers assess relevance, rigor, methods, evidence, interpretation, clarity, ethics, and contribution.
Editorial decision
The volume editor considers the reviews and the manuscript as a whole. Possible outcomes include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, resubmission, or decline.
Author revision
Authors submit a revised manuscript and a clear point-by-point response explaining how each comment was addressed or respectfully justified.
Verification and sign-off
The revision may return to reviewers when substantial changes require confirmation. The editor makes the final scholarly decision after all conditions are satisfied.
Production
Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, reference checking, layout, author proofing, final correction, issue assembly, and publication.
What reviewers consider
Scholarly quality and responsible research.
Contribution
Originality, significance, relevance to the journal, and value to scholarship or practice.
Rigor
Appropriateness and transparency of the design, methods, evidence, analysis, and interpretation.
Clarity
Logical organization, clear argument, accurate reporting, and discipline-appropriate presentation.
Ethics
Participant protection, consent, permissions, authorship, disclosure, citation, and research integrity.
Accept
The paper is ready for production, subject to routine editorial preparation.
Minor revision
Focused changes are needed before final acceptance can be considered.
Major revision
Substantive changes and a detailed author response are required.
Resubmit or decline
The manuscript requires fundamental redevelopment or is not suitable for publication in XAGJ.
Confidentiality and conflicts
Editors and reviewers must treat manuscripts and review materials as confidential, disclose relevant conflicts of interest, and recuse themselves when impartial assessment could reasonably be questioned. Reviewer comments should be specific, evidence-based, respectful, and directed toward the work rather than the author.
Authors may raise a reasoned appeal or complaint through the editorial office. Appeals are considered on the basis of process, evidence, and journal policy; disagreement with an editorial judgment alone does not guarantee reconsideration.
Preparing a submission?
Review the manuscript requirements, ethics declarations, supporting files, and pre-submission checklist.