All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Educational Sciences undergo an initial screening before being sent for peer review to ensure that they are consistent with the Journal’s scope, submission requirements, and established scientific and ethical standards. The Journal may decline to proceed with any manuscript that does not meet these requirements without sending it for peer review.
The Journal follows a double-blind peer review process, whereby the identities of the authors are not disclosed to the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors.
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on the relevance of their expertise to the manuscript, their scholarly experience, their independence, and the absence of any conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of the review.
The peer-review process includes an assessment of the originality and scientific significance of the research; the clarity of its objectives; the appropriateness of its theoretical framework; the soundness of its methodology, procedures, instruments, and data analysis methods; the accuracy of the presentation, interpretation, and discussion of the findings; the consistency of the conclusions and recommendations with the findings; the accuracy of citations and references; and compliance with relevant scientific and ethical requirements.
Reviewers must provide an objective, clear, and constructive scholarly assessment and refrain from personal or unprofessional comments. They must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and all information associated with it and must not share the manuscript or use any unpublished information, ideas, or data contained in it for any purpose outside the peer-review process.
Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect the independence of their assessment and decline the review whenever they are unable to provide an objective and impartial evaluation. They must also inform the Journal if they suspect plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate publication, or any other scientific or ethical misconduct.
Where there is a substantial disagreement between the reports of the two reviewers, the Journal may refer the manuscript to a third reviewer for an additional assessment. Reviewers’ reports constitute scholarly recommendations that inform the Journal’s decision-making and do not, in themselves, represent a final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.
The final editorial decision on a manuscript is made by the Journal based on the results of the initial screening and peer review, the author’s response to reviewers’ comments, and compliance with the Journal’s scientific and ethical standards and policies. The submission of a manuscript for peer review does not constitute or imply any commitment to accept it for publication.
The Journal of Educational Sciences is committed to the principles of integrity, honesty, and transparency in scientific research and scholarly publishing. These principles apply to all manuscripts submitted to or published in the Journal and to all parties involved in the publication process.
Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of submitted manuscripts, the accuracy of the information, data, and results reported therein, the validity of the scientific procedures used in data collection, analysis, and interpretation, and compliance with all relevant regulations and ethical requirements.
The Journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form; the fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of data or results; the manipulation of images, tables, figures, or analytical outputs in ways that may affect the interpretation of results; or the use of others’ work, ideas, or data without appropriate acknowledgment and citation.
The same manuscript may not be submitted to more than one journal simultaneously. Authors may not submit work that has previously been published in whole or in substantial part, republish previously published content in a manner that presents it as new work, or divide a single study into multiple publications without scientific justification.
Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made a substantial scholarly contribution to the research, participated in its preparation or scholarly review, approved the final version, and accepted appropriate responsibility for its content. Individuals who have not made a contribution sufficient to justify authorship may not be listed as authors, and individuals who have made a substantial scholarly contribution may not be excluded from authorship.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors have approved the submission of the manuscript, the order in which their names appear, and the final version submitted for publication. No author may be added or removed, nor may the order of authors be changed after submission, except with clear justification, the consent of all authors, and the approval of the Journal.
Authors must ensure the accuracy of citations and references and their actual relevance to the content of the manuscript. Citation manipulation and the inclusion of references that do not contribute to the research for the purpose of increasing citations to the work of a particular researcher, journal, or institution are not permitted.
All necessary approvals must be obtained before conducting research that requires ethical or institutional approval, and such approvals must be disclosed when the manuscript is submitted to the Journal. Informed consent must also be obtained from participants whenever required. Authors must protect participants’ privacy and the confidentiality of their data and comply with the specific ethical requirements applicable to minors and other groups requiring additional protection.
Authors must disclose all sources of research funding and any relevant conflicts of interest in accordance with the Journal’s policies.
The Journal may use appropriate tools and methods to verify the originality and scientific integrity of submitted manuscripts. Results generated by similarity-checking software or other automated tools shall not, on their own, constitute conclusive evidence of misconduct. Such results must be evaluated and verified before any action is taken.
Where scientific or ethical misconduct is suspected, the Journal may suspend the processing of the manuscript and request any necessary clarifications, data, or documentation. The Journal shall take appropriate action according to the nature and severity of the violation and the stage at which it is identified. Such action may include discontinuing the publication process, taking corrective action after publication, or referring the matter to the appropriate authority when warranted.
The Journal of Educational Sciences requires the disclosure of conflicts of interest at all stages of manuscript submission, peer review, and editorial decision-making.
Authors must disclose any financial, professional, personal, or institutional interests related to the research that could influence its design, conduct, data analysis, interpretation of findings, or presentation for publication. Authors must also disclose all sources of research funding and related support, where applicable.
The existence of a conflict of interest does not necessarily result in the rejection of a manuscript. Any conflict must be disclosed so that the Journal can manage it according to its nature and potential impact. Where no relevant conflict of interest exists, authors must provide a statement to that effect.
Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest related to a manuscript assigned to them and decline the review whenever a relationship or interest could affect the independence or objectivity of their assessment.
The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board must disclose any conflict of interest related to manuscripts they handle. An individual with a conflict of interest must not participate in the initial screening of the manuscript, the selection of reviewers, or the editorial decision. In such cases, responsibility for the relevant editorial procedures must be assigned to another independent editor.
Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, or Journal staff are subject to the same scientific and editorial procedures applied to all other manuscripts. The submitting individual must not participate in the selection of reviewers, the peer-review process, or any editorial decision concerning their own manuscript.
Sources of funding and personal, professional, or institutional relationships must not influence the selection of reviewers, the outcome of the peer-review process, or decisions concerning the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.
If an undisclosed conflict of interest is identified, the Journal will request clarification from the relevant party and take appropriate action according to the nature and potential impact of the conflict and the stage at which it is identified. If a conflict of interest is discovered after publication, the Journal will take appropriate action in accordance with its Corrections and Retractions Policy.
The Journal of Educational Sciences treats all submitted manuscripts and all related information, documents, and correspondence as confidential throughout the screening, peer-review, and editorial decision-making processes.
The Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, Journal staff, and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and must not disclose their content, data, findings, or related information to any person who is not involved in the relevant editorial or scientific processes, unless disclosure is required for ethical or regulatory reasons.
Reviewers must not share a manuscript or any part of it with another person, retain copies for use outside the peer-review process, or use any unpublished information, ideas, data, or findings contained in the manuscript for personal, academic, or professional benefit.
Similarly, the Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, and Journal staff must not use unpublished information obtained through their roles for any purpose outside the publication process.
The Journal protects the confidentiality of reviewers’ identities in accordance with its double-blind peer-review system. Peer-review reports and related correspondence are also treated as confidential information.
The confidentiality of manuscripts and data must be maintained when using digital systems, platforms, and tools. The use of artificial intelligence tools is subject to the Journal’s applicable policy on the use of artificial intelligence.
The obligation to maintain confidentiality continues after the completion of the peer-review process or the issuance of an editorial decision, regardless of whether the manuscript is accepted, rejected, or withdrawn.
Authors are responsible for the validity, accuracy, and originality of the data and materials used in their research, as well as for the integrity of the procedures used to collect, process, analyze, and interpret them.
Data must not be fabricated, falsified, misrepresented, omitted, or altered in a manner that results in misleading findings or conclusions. Unjustified modifications to images, figures, or research materials that may affect their scientific interpretation are also prohibited.
Authors must retain the data, documentation, and primary materials associated with their research in accordance with applicable ethical, institutional, and regulatory requirements and in a manner that allows them to be accessed when necessary.
The Journal may request data, materials, or supporting documentation when necessary to verify the integrity of the data or findings or to address a scientific or ethical matter related to the research.
The Journal encourages authors to make data and supporting materials associated with published research available through appropriate research data repositories whenever possible, subject to applicable ethical and regulatory requirements, intellectual property rights, and the protection of participants’ privacy and the confidentiality of their data.
Access to data may be restricted for ethical, legal, or contractual reasons; to meet privacy or confidentiality requirements; or to protect the rights of third parties. Such restrictions should be clearly stated where appropriate.
Personal information or data that could identify research participants must not be published except in accordance with the relevant ethical approvals and applicable regulations.
First: General Principles
The Journal of Educational Sciences at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University recognizes the rapid development in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and technologies in scientific research and academic publishing, as well as the potential of these tools to support certain stages of research preparation and enhance the efficiency of research and editorial work. At the same time, their use raises a number of considerations related to research integrity, originality, authorship, transparency, confidentiality, data protection, and responsibility for published content.
In keeping with the Journal’s commitment to the ethics of scientific research and publishing, this policy has been developed in light of the Guidelines for the Principles of Using Artificial Intelligence in Saudi Public and Private Universities and Colleges, issued by the Council of Universities Affairs, and with reference to the relevant principles and guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM) regarding the use of AI tools in research and academic publishing.
This policy aims to regulate the use of AI tools by authors, reviewers, and editors in a manner that ensures transparency and academic integrity, safeguards confidentiality and intellectual property, and affirms that intellectual, scientific, and ethical responsibility for research, peer review, and editorial decisions remains a human responsibility that may not be delegated to AI systems.
This policy applies to generative AI tools, large language models, and other AI-based tools and applications, including tools that may emerge in the future and perform similar functions.
Second: Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence by Authors
1. Artificial Intelligence and Authorship
No AI tool or system may be listed as an author or co-author of any manuscript submitted to the Journal.
AI tools do not meet the criteria for scholarly authorship because they cannot assume scientific, ethical, or legal responsibility for published content; make an independent intellectual contribution for which they can be held scientifically accountable; disclose conflicts of interest; or approve the final version of a manuscript and its publication.
Accordingly, authorship must be limited to researchers who meet the Journal’s approved authorship criteria. Authors bear full responsibility for all parts of the manuscript, including any content prepared or modified with the assistance of AI tools.
2. Permitted Uses
Authors may use AI tools as assistive tools during certain stages of research preparation, provided that such tools do not replace the author’s intellectual and scientific contribution and that their use does not conflict with the requirements of research integrity, transparency, and confidentiality.
Permitted uses may include:
• Linguistic, spelling, and grammatical proofreading.
• Improving the clarity, style, and organization of text.
• Translation and linguistic assistance.
• Assisting in organizing preliminary ideas, without replacing the author’s intellectual contribution.
• Programming assistance and writing or reviewing code used in data analysis.
• Providing technical or statistical assistance, provided that authors verify the accuracy of the procedures and outputs.
• Assisting in the preparation of figures or visualizations in accordance with the provisions of this policy.
The use of AI tools does not relieve authors of their responsibility to review all outputs and verify their accuracy, validity, and appropriateness before incorporating them into the manuscript.
3. Disclosure of the Use of Artificial Intelligence
Authors must clearly disclose any substantive use of AI tools in the preparation of a manuscript.
Depending on the nature of the use, the disclosure should include:
• The name and version of the tool used, where applicable.
• The purpose for which it was used.
• The section or stage in which the tool was used.
• The nature of the assistance provided.
• Confirmation that the authors reviewed and verified the outputs and accept responsibility for them.
The disclosure should be included in the Methods section when the AI tool forms part of the research procedures or data analysis, or in a separate disclosure or acknowledgment section when its use relates to manuscript preparation.
Suggested Disclosure Statement for the Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools
“The author(s) used [name and version of the tool, if applicable] to assist with [description of the purpose of use] in [specify the section or stage in which the tool was used]. The authors reviewed all outputs generated through its use, verified their accuracy and appropriateness, and assume full responsibility for the final content of the manuscript.”
Disclosure does not relieve authors of responsibility for the content of the manuscript or of compliance with all publication policies and ethical standards adopted by the Journal.
4. Accuracy of Information and Scholarly References
Authors bear full responsibility for verifying all information and content generated or suggested by AI tools. References or studies suggested by AI tools may not be cited without consulting the original sources and verifying their existence, accuracy, and content.
5. Data, Results, and Analysis
AI tools may not be used for any of the following purposes:
• Fabricating research data or generating data and presenting them as genuine data.
• Fabricating results or improperly modifying them.
• Altering values or statistical results in a manner that misrepresents the findings of the study.
• Creating fictitious participant responses and presenting them as genuine responses.
• Misrepresenting original data.
• Fabricating evidence, findings, or quotations.
AI tools may be used to assist with data analysis, code writing, or interpretation of technical outputs, provided that authors independently verify the validity of the procedures and results and disclose such use in accordance with this policy when it is substantive.
6. Originality and Plagiarism
AI tools may not be used to circumvent originality requirements or conceal plagiarism.
This includes:
• Paraphrasing text taken from other sources for the purpose of concealing its source.
• Using AI to reduce similarity scores without scientifically addressing the causes of similarity.
• Translating works published in another language and presenting them as original work.
• Reproducing the ideas of others without citing the original sources.
Rules governing quotation, citation, and intellectual property apply to all manuscript content regardless of whether AI tools were used in its preparation.
7. Images, Figures, and Visual Content
AI tools may not be used to create or modify images, figures, or visual content in a manner that misrepresents data or findings or presents false information as research findings.
AI tools may be used to prepare supporting visual content provided that:
• The content is based on accurate data or sound scientific concepts.
• The use of the tool does not alter the data or misrepresent the findings.
• The authors review the content and verify its accuracy.
• The use of AI is disclosed in accordance with this policy when such use is substantive.
AI tools may not be used to modify original research images or materials in a manner that adds, removes, or alters characteristics that could affect the interpretation of the findings.
Third: Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence by Reviewers
8. Confidentiality in the Peer-Review Process
Manuscripts submitted to the Journal, peer-review reports, data, and related information are considered confidential materials.
Reviewers may not upload an entire manuscript, any part thereof, its supplementary materials, data, figures, or any unpublished information related to it to public or external AI tools that do not guarantee content confidentiality, data protection, and intellectual property protection.
9. Human Responsibility for Peer Review
A peer-review report must be based on the reviewer’s scientific reading, expertise, critical thinking, and independent scholarly judgment.
Reviewers may not:
• Delegate the evaluation of a manuscript to an AI tool.
• Use an AI tool to issue a recommendation to accept or reject a manuscript.
• Rely on automated evaluation of the methodology or findings instead of the reviewer’s own scholarly assessment.
• Assign an AI tool to independently prepare a peer-review report.
• Enter confidential information concerning authors, participants, or unpublished findings into external tools.
The reviewer remains fully responsible for the content of the review report, the accuracy of the comments provided, and the recommendation submitted to the Journal.
10. Permitted Uses by Reviewers
Reviewers may use AI tools for limited supporting purposes, such as linguistic proofreading or improving the wording of a peer-review report that they have prepared themselves, provided that they comply with the confidentiality requirements set out in this policy and do not enter any confidential manuscript content or data into such tools.
Reviewers remain responsible for reviewing any outputs generated through the use of AI tools and for the final content of their peer-review reports.
Fourth: Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence by Editors
11. Editorial Confidentiality
The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, author information, reviewer identities, peer-review reports, confidential editorial correspondence, and unpublished data and findings.
Such materials may not be entered into public or unauthorized AI tools that do not guarantee the protection of confidentiality, data, and intellectual property.
12. Supporting Editorial Uses
Approved AI tools may be used for certain administrative or organizational support tasks that do not conflict with confidentiality requirements, including:
• Assisting in the preparation of general administrative correspondence.
• Improving the linguistic quality of correspondence.
• Organizing non-confidential information.
• Extracting statistical and administrative indicators from data whose use is permitted under confidentiality and data protection requirements.
• Assisting with the preliminary verification of certain formal requirements of the Journal.
All outputs generated by such tools must be reviewed by a human before they are approved, used, or communicated.
13. Editorial Decisions
Editorial decisions may not be delegated to AI tools or systems.
This includes:
• Deciding whether to send a manuscript for peer review.
• Selecting reviewers through a fully automated process without human oversight.
• Deciding whether to request revisions.
• Deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript.
• Independently determining whether a publication ethics violation has occurred through automated means.
• Issuing a final judgment regarding the originality or scientific quality of a manuscript.
All editorial decisions must remain human decisions, for which the Editor-in-Chief and the responsible editor are accountable in accordance with the Journal’s policies.
14. AI-Generated Content Detection Tools
The Journal may use available technological tools for detecting AI-generated content as supporting indicators when screening manuscripts. However, the results of such tools may not be relied upon alone to establish that a violation has occurred, reject a manuscript, or accuse an author of an ethical violation.
Where improper use of AI is suspected, the case shall be assessed in light of the available evidence and information, and the Journal may request clarification or additional information from the authors before taking appropriate action.
Fifth: Violations and Procedures
The use of AI tools constitutes a violation of publication ethics when it results in:
• Fabrication of data, results, or references.
• Misrepresentation of data, images, or findings.
• Violation of intellectual property rights.
• Concealment of plagiarism or circumvention of similarity screening.
• Breach of the confidentiality of participants, manuscripts, or the peer-review process.
• Failure to disclose substantive use of AI tools.
• Submission of AI-generated or AI-modified content without verification and acceptance of responsibility for it.
• Delegation of peer review or editorial decisions to AI systems.
When a violation is suspected, the Journal has the right to request clarification or documentation from the parties concerned and to take appropriate action according to the nature of the violation, the stage at which it is identified, the Journal’s policies, and applicable publication ethics standards.
Depending on the nature of the violation and the stage at which it is discovered, actions may include requesting clarification or correction, returning the manuscript to the authors, rejecting the manuscript, taking appropriate measures if the violation is discovered after publication, or taking action concerning a reviewer or editor in cases involving breaches of confidentiality or integrity.
Sixth: Review and Updating
Given the rapid development of AI technologies and the standards and practices governing their use in scholarly publishing, this policy shall be periodically reviewed and updated in accordance with relevant developments and professional and ethical guidance.
At all stages of research, publication, peer review, and editorial work, this policy is founded on four core principles: human responsibility, transparency, research integrity, and the protection of confidentiality and intellectual property.
The Journal of Educational Sciences is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record and takes appropriate action when errors or misconduct are identified in published research.
If an error is identified in a published article that does not materially affect the reliability of its findings or conclusions, the Journal will publish a correction describing the nature of the error and the amendment made. The correction will be clearly linked to the original article.
An article may be retracted if its findings or conclusions are found to be substantially unreliable as a result of a serious error, or if there is evidence of fabrication, falsification, substantial plagiarism, unauthorized duplicate publication, manipulation of the peer-review or publication process, or serious ethical misconduct that compromises the integrity of the published research.
The Journal will investigate cases that may warrant correction or retraction and may request explanations, data, or supporting documentation from the authors or other relevant parties before reaching a decision.
When an article is retracted, the Journal will publish a clear retraction notice linked to the original article. The notice will state the reason for the retraction, as appropriate, and the article page will be clearly marked to indicate that the article has been retracted.
A retracted article will not be removed from the scholarly record solely because a retraction decision has been issued. Its bibliographic information and article page will remain available with its retracted status clearly indicated. The content will be removed entirely only in exceptional circumstances where required by legal or judicial obligations or by significant privacy or safety considerations.
The Journal may take other post-publication actions, including publishing a correction, clarification, or other appropriate notice, depending on the nature of the case and its impact on the integrity of the scholarly record.
The Journal of Educational Sciences accepts complaints and appeals concerning manuscript submission, screening and peer-review procedures, editorial decisions, and matters related to research and publication ethics.
Complaints or appeals must be submitted through the Journal’s official communication channel. The submission should clearly state the subject and grounds of the complaint or appeal and include any supporting information or documentation, where applicable.
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when there is reason to believe that a substantial error occurred in the procedures or evaluation of the manuscript, that a conflict of interest or a violation of the Journal’s policies occurred, or that a scientific or ethical matter may have affected the decision.
An author’s disagreement with the reviewers’ opinions or dissatisfaction with an editorial decision does not, in itself, constitute sufficient grounds for reconsideration unless specific scientific or procedural reasons are provided.
The Journal will review the complaint or appeal and the information associated with it and may request additional clarification from the complainant, appellant, or other relevant parties.
If a complaint or appeal directly concerns an individual who participated in making the decision being challenged, that individual shall not be solely responsible for reviewing the complaint or appeal. Where possible, the matter will be referred to another individual or an appropriate editorial body for independent consideration.
The Journal handles complaints and appeals confidentially and objectively and will inform the complainant or appellant of the outcome once the necessary review procedures have been completed.
Submitting an appeal does not automatically suspend or overturn the original decision. Any decision issued following completion of the appeal process will form part of the manuscript’s editorial record.
The Journal of Educational Sciences may publish special issues on topics that fall within its scholarly scope, subject to the approval of the Editorial Board and in accordance with the Journal’s established procedures.
All manuscripts submitted to special issues are subject to the same scientific, ethical, and editorial standards applied to manuscripts submitted to regular issues. An invitation to contribute to a special issue, or the submission of a manuscript to a special issue, does not guarantee acceptance for publication.
Manuscripts submitted to special issues are subject to independent peer review in accordance with the Journal’s established peer-review system. Without exception, the Journal’s standard procedures for screening, peer review, and editorial decision-making apply to all such manuscripts.
The Journal may appoint one or more editors with appropriate expertise and qualifications to oversee a special issue. Such editors may be members of the Journal’s Editorial Board or external experts. The Journal shall define their responsibilities, and they shall work under the supervision of the Editor-in-Chief and in accordance with the Journal’s policies and procedures.
Special issue editors must comply with the Journal’s policies concerning peer review, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, and research and publication ethics.
A special issue editor who is a member of the Journal’s Editorial Board may not submit or publish a manuscript in the special issue if they are a co-author of that manuscript while serving as the editor of, or otherwise overseeing, the special issue.
A guest editor who is not a member of the Journal’s Editorial Board may submit a manuscript to the special issue they are editing, provided that they take no part whatsoever in the manuscript’s initial screening, selection of reviewers, peer-review process, or editorial decision. All procedures relating to such a manuscript must be assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or another independent editor who has no conflict of interest. The manuscript shall be subject to the same standards and peer-review procedures applied to all other manuscripts.
Manuscripts authored or co-authored by a guest editor or guest editors who are not members of the Journal’s Editorial Board must not exceed 25% of the total number of articles published in the special issue.
Final responsibility for editorial decisions and the content of the special issue rests with the Editor-in-Chief and the Journal. No funding, sponsoring, or collaborating organization involved in the preparation of a special issue may influence the selection of reviewers, the peer-review process, or decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
The Journal of Educational Sciences currently does not charge authors any fees for manuscript submission, screening, peer review, or publication. The Journal also does not charge subscription or access fees for published articles, including fees for reading or downloading their full texts.
The acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is not linked to any financial payment. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of the scientific, ethical, and editorial standards adopted by the Journal.
Authors will not be charged any fees that have not been clearly disclosed in the Journal’s published policies.
If fees are introduced in the future, the Journal will clearly announce them before they take effect, specifying the type and amount of the fees, the stage at which they become payable, and any applicable waivers. Any such fees will be implemented in accordance with the approved procedures and regulations of the University.
