Smart: Journal of Psychology and Counseling Education (SPsych) adheres to a rigorous and systematic peer review process to ensure that all published research meets the highest standards of scientific integrity, methodological soundness, and practical relevance. To maintain absolute objectivity and minimize bias, the journal employs a Double-Blind Peer Review model, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept strictly confidential throughout the evaluation cycle.

1. Initial Submission and Technical Screening

Upon submission through the Online Journal System (OJS), every manuscript undergoes a preliminary technical screening. The Editorial Office checks for:

• Compliance with Formatting Guidelines: Ensuring the manuscript follows the Chicago Manual of Style 17th Edition (Full Note).
• Plagiarism Detection: Utilizing specialized software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate) to ensure original content. SPsych maintains a strict threshold for similarity indexes to uphold academic honesty.
• Anonymization Verification: Confirming that all author names, institutional affiliations, and identifying metadata have been removed from the main document to protect the integrity of the double-blind process.

2. Editorial Desk Review

Manuscripts that pass the technical screening are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Section Editor. During this phase, the editor evaluates the submission based on:

• Aims and Scope: Does the topic align with psychology or counseling education?
• Significance: Does the research offer a meaningful contribution to the field?
• Scientific Quality: Are the research questions clear and the methodology robust?

If a manuscript is deemed fundamentally flawed or outside the journal’s scope, it may be "Desk Rejected" at this stage without further review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review Phase

Submissions that pass the desk review are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers within the relevant domain. Reviewers are selected based on their established expertise in specific sub-fields of psychology, counseling techniques, or educational pedagogy.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the following criteria:

• Originality: Is the work novel and not a simple duplication of existing literature?
• Methodological Rigor: Is the research design, sampling, and data analysis appropriate and transparent?
• Ethical Standards: Does the study demonstrate adherence to ethical protocols (e.g., informed consent, IRB approval)?
• Clarity and Logic: Is the argument well-structured and the conclusion supported by the evidence provided?

4. Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decision

After completing their assessment, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations to the Editor:

1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is ready for publication as is.
2. Revisions Required (Minor): The manuscript is strong but requires small adjustments or clarifications.
3. Resubmit for Review (Major): Significant flaws or gaps exist that require substantial rewriting and potentially a second round of full review.
4. Decline Submission: The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to critical theoretical or methodological deficiencies.

5. Revision and Final Approval

If revisions are requested, authors must provide a revised manuscript along with a Response to Reviewers document, detailing how each point of feedback was addressed. The Editor then assesses whether the revisions satisfy the reviewers' concerns. The final authority to accept or reject a manuscript rests solely with the Editorial Board, ensuring that every article in SPsych contributes to the advancement of the counseling and psychological professions.

6. Post-Acceptance and Production

Once a manuscript is officially accepted, it enters the production phase, which includes professional copyediting, layout design, and proofreading. Authors are given a final opportunity to review the "galley proof" before the article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and published online in the designated issue.