Journal of Urban Science Education (JUSE) will implement a double-blind peer review process with desk screening, a minimum of two reviewers per manuscript, and clearly defined processing timelines (desk screening 2 weeks; review 4–6 weeks). This process is designed to ensure fairness, scientific quality, and transparency in publication decision-making.

Core Principles and Objectives
The primary objective of the review process is to assess the manuscript’s originality, methodology, theoretical/practical contribution, and ethical compliance. Double-blind review conceals the identities of authors and reviewers to reduce bias based on reputation or affiliation, although it may not be perfect in practice.

Step-by-Step Workflow (Recommended)

1. Desk screening (2 weeks) — The Editor in Chief or Associate Editor checks scope, format, ethics (plagiarism), and completeness of metadata.

2. Reviewer assignment (1 week) — Select two relevant expert reviewers; ensure there are no conflicts of interest.

3. Independent review (4–6 weeks) — Reviewers evaluate novelty, methodology, analysis, and conclusions; provide structured comments (strengths, weaknesses, suggestions). Brief reviewer guidelines help ensure consistency.

4. Reviewer recommendations — Accept; Minor Revision; Major Revision; Reject. Reviewers complete a recommendation form and summary for the editor.

5. Editorial decision — The editor synthesizes recommendations and makes the final decision; communicates the outcome and reviewer comments to the author(s).

6. Revision & verification — Authors submit revisions; the editor/reviewers verify the changes.

7. Finalization & production — Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copy-editing, proofing, and publication.