1. Initial assessment of the relevance to the theme and correspondence to the IJODH instructions is carried out by the editorial committee. Ineligible articles are immediately notified to the author(s).

2. Eligible articles are evaluated by two referees as an academic review by the criteria as follow:
1) Academic, practical or technical relevance of the theme;
2) Academic relevance of the research method;
3) Professionalism and level of technical description;
4) The research carried out and/or logic of the process or outcome;
5) Academic or practical contribution of the research outcome;

3. Reviewers are selected from the list of reviewers recommended by the editorial committee and asked to review a manuscript. The reviewers shall follow the ethics guideline for reviewers:

• The reviewers shall examine the papers commissioned by the editors of IJODH according to the peer review policy of IJODH and notify the editors of the review results. If the reviewers believe that he or she is not a good candidate for reviewing a paper, he or she may notify the editors to evade the review.
• The reviewers shall evaluate the article justly based on objective criteria, regardless of their personal academic beliefs or relationship with the authors.
• The reviewers shall immediately notify the editors when he or she finds that the paper to be reviewed has already been published or when he or she finds a problem related to research misconduct.
• The reviewers shall not disclose the details of the paper reviewed. Additionally, the reviewers should not cite the content of the paper or disclose the review results without the author’s consent before the paper is published in IJODH.

4. The submitted articles can be revised or re-assessed in accordance to the assessment result as follows:

* A : Accept for publication / B : Publish after revision / C : Non-acceptance

5. The Secretariat organizes copy-editing and proofreading the accepted articles for publication in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief when necessary. The Secretariat shall request Copyright License Agreement to the author.

6. A proof copy of the final edited script will be provided to the author(s) for final review prior to the publication.

7. Complaints and Appeals
The International Journal of Documentary Heritage (IJODH) takes research integrity seriously. Authors, reviewers, and readers are encouraged to report any concerns about:

• Falsification or fabrication of data
• Plagiarism, including abuse of Artificial Intelligence
• Duplicate publication
• Authorship disputes
• Conflicts of interest
• Copyright infringement
• Data theft
• Defamation
• Legal issues

To report a concern, please submit a detailed letter via the “Contact Us” page on our website. Include specific information about the allegation, answering the following questions:

• Who is involved?
• When did the alleged misconduct occur?
• Where did it occur (e.g., manuscript, review, website)?
• What specific actions are being challenged?
• How and why do you believe this is a violation?

The Editor-in-Chief will review all complaints and appeals promptly. The consequences of any misconduct will be determined based on the nature and severity of the violation. The Editorial Committee will then issue a final resolution.

8. Conflict of Interest
The International Journal of Documentary Heritage (IJODH) upholds strict standards of research integrity. We require all authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their judgment or actions.

Conflict of interest examples:

• Financial ties to entities with interests in the research (e.g., funding source, paid consulting)
• Personal relationships with study participants or collaborators
• Intellectual property interests related to the research

Disclosure guidelines:

• Authors must disclose all potential conflicts of interest in their submitted manuscripts.
• Disclosure should be included in a dedicated section of the manuscript.
• Be specific and transparent about the nature and extent of the conflict.
• If no conflicts exist, explicitly state this.

Benefits of disclosure:

• Promote research transparency and credibility
• Allow editors, reviewers, and readers to assess potential biases
• Maintain public trust in research findings

Approach to disclosed conflicts:

• The presence of a disclosed conflict does not automatically disqualify a manuscript.
• Editors and reviewers will consider the disclosure alongside the overall merit of the research.
• Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the research in light of disclosed conflicts.