Editorial Policy

Last updated: 27 September 2026

JQPP uses editorial review rather than external peer review. Publication requires more than topical relevance: a manuscript must present a defined contribution, support its claims with evidence appropriate to the article type, disclose material limitations, and be suitable for a durable public record.

Publication standard

A manuscript should satisfy all of the following at the point of acceptance:

• Defined contribution. The paper identifies a question, problem, case, method, decision, or professional issue and makes clear what the reader learns from it.
• Traceable reasoning. Material conclusions can be followed from the evidence, analysis, cases, sources, or professional observations presented.
• Proportionate evidence. The strength and scope of claims do not exceed the evidence available.
• Source integrity. Citations are relevant, identifiable, and accurately represented. Material factual claims should be attributable where attribution is reasonably possible.
• Transparency. Important limitations, conflicts of interest, funding, ethics considerations, material AI use, and data-access constraints are disclosed where applicable.
• Original value. The work offers original analysis, a useful case, a method, a technical contribution, or a synthesis that adds practical value beyond restating readily available material.
• Publication readiness. The manuscript is coherent, readable, internally consistent, and sufficiently complete to stand as a public article rather than a private memo, promotional document, or unfinished note.

Evidence expectations by article type

Applied Research Article

A clear research or analytical question, transparent basis for analysis, evidence appropriate to the claim, and discussion of material limitations.

Professional Practice Article

A defined practice problem or decision context, enough operational detail to understand the reasoning, and lessons that extend beyond personal opinion.

Case Study

A clearly bounded case, factual context, distinction between observation and interpretation, and a reason the case is informative beyond the specific organization or event.

Research or Technical Note

A focused method, model, dataset, implementation issue, or finding described precisely enough for an informed reader to assess its usefulness and limitations.

Preprints and duplicate publication

Posting a manuscript on SSRN or another legitimate preprint or working-paper server does not by itself make the manuscript ineligible for JQPP. The prior version must be disclosed during submission. JQPP does not permit simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals.

If substantially the same work has already been formally published by another journal or publisher, JQPP will normally treat it as prior publication rather than a preprint. Any justified secondary publication requires full disclosure, appropriate rights or permissions, and explicit editorial approval.

Initial assessment

Submissions may be declined without revision when they fall outside scope, lack a coherent purpose, are primarily promotional, present unsupported assertions as findings, have serious citation or originality concerns, or are not sufficiently developed for public publication.

Grounds for rejection

JQPP may reject a manuscript where there is credible evidence of fabricated or falsified material, invented or materially misleading citations, plagiarism, undisclosed duplicate publication, deceptive authorship, unlawful or unauthorized use of third-party material, or other conduct that undermines the reliability or legality of the proposed publication.

Heavy use of generative AI is not automatically disqualifying. However, AI-generated text, references, analysis, or figures remain the responsibility of the human authors and must meet the same evidentiary, attribution, and accuracy standards as any other content.

Editorial process

1. Invitation / intake. JQPP first confirms that the proposed manuscript is plausibly within scope before issuing a private submission link.
2. Completeness check. Required manuscript files, author data, classifications, declarations, and rights confirmations are checked.
3. Editorial assessment. The editor assesses the manuscript against the publication standard above.
4. Decision. The outcome is accept, revise, or reject. A revision request is not a promise of acceptance.
5. Accepted-paper verification. Final metadata, disclosures, permissions, license, and publication file are checked before payment and publication.

Editorial independence

Publication payment is not considered in the editorial decision. No publication fee is charged before acceptance. Where an editor has a material personal, professional, or financial conflict concerning a submission, the decision should be reassigned or otherwise handled to preserve independent judgment.

Post-publication record

Material errors may be corrected after publication. Serious reliability, integrity, or legal problems may lead to withdrawal or retraction with a public explanatory record where appropriate. See Corrections & Retractions.