Peer Review Process
- The Editor-in-Chief evaluates any submitted manuscript at the preliminary stage for acceptability of the subject as per the scope of the journal and conformity article type.
- The IJETP editorial office will perform a plagiarism check on all submitted manuscripts. The report's similarity index should not surpass 18%.
- Once the plagiarism check is completed and approved, the manuscripts will be assigned a manuscript number. If any article is found to have a similarity index of more than 18% will be summarily rejected at this stage.
- Once the manuscript number has been assigned, the Editor-in-Chief will assign associate Editors depending on their expertise with the manuscript. If the article falls within the Editor’s research interests, it is expected that the assigned peer reviewer will begin working on it as soon as possible. The Associate Editor will be given a set period to complete the assignment. If he or she wishes to decline the assignment owing to a personal reason, he or she should notify the Editor-in-Chief as soon as practical.
- The appointed Associate Editor will first review the article for acceptability and originality, as well as whether it falls within the journal's scope. If the manuscript does not conform with the journal's publishing policies, he or she can decide whether it is approved for peer review or be sent back to the author for modification before peer review.
- For each manuscript assigned, the Associate Editor will identify two possible peer reviewers based on their competence in the relevant subject areas and then oversee the review process.
- A basic grammatical check on the manuscript must be performed by the Associate Editor before sending the article to the peer reviewers.
- The Associate Editor will send the manuscript together with the IJETP -Peer Review Form to the reviewers for writing their evaluation report.
- Manuscripts submitted to IJETP are subjected to a double-blind peer-review process. In this process, the reviewer's names and author names are hidden (i.e. the reviewer will not know who the author is and vice-versa).
- The review process and submission of recommendations for any article will take 28 days
- The Editor will keep in mind the policy of prompt and thorough peer review. If the reviewer's evaluation report is delayed, he or she must contact the reviewers.
- For any manuscript to be accepted it is required to have positive comments from the reviewers. Comments provided by the reviewers should convey their final decision within the following types:
- Accept without changes (acceptance)
- Accept with minor revision (acceptance)
- Accept with major revision (conditional acceptance)
- Revise and resubmit (conditional acceptance)
- Rejection (decline with Justification).(outright rejection)
- Once the Associate Editor has received the reviewers' evaluation reports, he or she forwards them to the Editor-in-Chief who or the Editorial Board must make a decision based on the observations and their relevance and suitability with the manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief (Editorial Board) decision is final in these situations. After the final judgment is made, neither the reviewers nor the writers have the right to ask any questions.
- If the Editor-in-Chief (Editorial Board) decides to send the article for revision based on reviewers’ comments, the Associate Editor will be forwarded it to the authors for revision.
- The authors are liable to send back the revised manuscript to the Editorial Office within the stipulated time.
- Once the revised manuscript is received, it will be further inspected with the incorporation of the specified points.
- The assigned Associate Editor may provide the decision or send it back to the reviewer once more depending on the comparative status and enrichment of the manuscript.
- In every step of processing, the Editor-in-Chief has the right to be involved and make the final decision for any publication-oriented issue.
