Peer Review Processes

Introduction

Peer review is central to the quality, credibility, and rigor of scholarly publishing. The International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology (IJASEIT) employs a structured peer review system designed to ensure fairness, objectivity, and scientific integrity. This policy adheres to the COPE Core Practices, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and international ethical guidelines.

Description

IJASEIT uses a double-blind peer review model, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This method minimizes bias and supports impartial evaluations based solely on the scientific content.

Each manuscript submitted to IJASEIT is reviewed by a minimum of two independent, expert reviewers, selected for their relevant academic expertise and subject knowledge. The editorial team ensures that reviewers are free from conflicts of interest and that their feedback is constructive, ethical, and aligned with journal standards.

Reviewers are recognized as intellectual contributors and retain copyright over their review reports. Their reviews remain confidential and are not shared or published without explicit consent.

Policy

1. Peer Review Model

  • IJASEIT applies a double-blind peer review process.

  • Author identities are not revealed to reviewers, and reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors.

  • Communication between authors and reviewers occurs only through the editorial system.

2. Reviewer Selection

  • Reviewers are selected based on their academic credentials, subject expertise, and prior publishing and reviewing experience.

  • Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from assignments where impartiality may be compromised.

  • IJASEIT maintains a database of qualified reviewers and regularly assesses their performance.

3. Review Process

  • Each manuscript is initially screened by the editorial office for scope, completeness, and adherence to submission guidelines.

  • Manuscripts passing the initial check are assigned to at least two external reviewers.

  • Reviewers are expected to evaluate:

    • Originality and novelty

    • Methodological rigor

    • Quality of data and analysis

    • Relevance to the field

    • Clarity of writing and structure

    • Ethical and legal compliance

  • Reviewers are required to submit their recommendations (accept, minor revision, major revision, reject) along with detailed comments for authors and confidential notes for editors.

4. Editorial Decision-Making

  • Editors base decisions on reviewers’ comments, their own evaluation, and journal scope.

  • Possible editorial outcomes include:

    • Acceptance

    • Minor revision

    • Major revision

    • Rejection

  • Revised manuscripts may be re-reviewed at the editor’s discretion.

  • Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editors.

5. Reviewer Rights and Responsibilities

  • Reviewers retain copyright of their reviews, which remain confidential and cannot be reused or published without written consent.

  • Reviews must be:

    • Objective and evidence-based

    • Free of personal bias or derogatory language

    • Submitted within the agreed timeframe

  • Reviewers must not use the manuscript content for personal advantage or share it with others.

6. Confidentiality and Security

  • All manuscripts and review documents are treated as confidential material.

  • Editors and staff may not disclose manuscript content, reviewer identities, or editorial discussions outside the editorial workflow.

  • Review files are securely stored and accessible only to authorized personnel.

7. Ethical Concerns During Review

  • If reviewers detect potential ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, misconduct), they must notify the editors immediately.

  • Editors will investigate and, if necessary, follow COPE procedures for ethical resolution.

8. Reviewer Acknowledgment

  • IJASEIT acknowledges the vital role of reviewers in maintaining journal standards.

  • Reviewers may request certificates of contribution and are invited to join the reviewer pool formally through periodic invitations.

9. Post-Publication Commentary

  • IJASEIT supports post-publication discussion and correction, but review reports remain confidential unless disclosed with the reviewer’s permission.

10. Policy Review

This policy is reviewed regularly to incorporate advancements in peer review ethics, editorial practices, and technology.