Reviewer Selection

• Reviewers are selected from a global network of experts in autism research, intervention,
  education, and support services
• Selection is based on subject-matter expertise relevant to the manuscript
  acceptance
• Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest (e.g., recent collaboration or institutional
  affiliation)
• Authors may suggest potential reviewers or request exclusions; final selection is made by
  the editorial team

Review Criteria

Manuscripts are evaluated using standardized criteria, including:

• Originality: Contribution of new knowledge or innovative approaches in autism research or practice
• Relevance: Alignment with the journal’s scope and focus on autism challenges and solutions
• Methodological Rigor: Sound research design, appropriate methods, and reproducibility
• Clarity of Results: Accurate analysis and clear presentation of findings
• Impact & Application: Practical, clinical, educational, or policy implications
• Ethical Compliance: Adherence to ethical standards, including research involving
  individuals with autism

Editorial Workflow

• Initial Screening: Assessment of scope, quality, completeness, plagiarism check, and
  anonymization
• Peer Review: Minimum of two independent expert reviewers
• Editorial Decisions:
  • Accept
  • Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions
  • Reject
• Revisions: Authors must provide a clear, point-by-point response to reviewer comments

Timelines

• IJACS follows internationally recognized publication ethics and best practices
• All submissions are screened for plagiarism
• Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality and may not share or use manuscript
  content
• The use of AI tools in manuscript preparation must be disclosed
• Ethical approval must be stated for studies involving human participants

 Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office within a reasonable
timeframe. Appeals are reviewed independently to ensure fairness and transparency.