Review Process

Peer Review Process

The peer review process at the Journal of Systems Engineering and Information Technology (JOSEIT) is designed to ensure the highest quality of published research. This process involves multiple stakeholders and rigorous evaluation to maintain scientific integrity and scholarly standards.

Core Principles
JOSEIT is committed to a fair, timely, thorough, and constructive peer review process that enhances the quality of published research while treating all manuscripts with respect and confidentiality. Our peer review system aims to identify methodologically sound research that makes a significant contribution to the field of systems engineering and information technology.

Types of Peer Review
JOSEIT employs a double-blind peer review process, where both authors' and reviewers' identities are concealed to minimize bias. In special cases, other review types may be used:

  1. Single-blind review: Reviewers know author identities but authors don't know reviewers
  2. Open review: Both author and reviewer identities are disclosed
  3. Transparent review: Review reports are published alongside articles

Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  1. Originality and innovation: The contribution to existing knowledge
  2. Methodological soundness: Appropriateness and rigor of research methods
  3. Validity of findings: Quality of data analysis and interpretation
  4. Clarity and coherence: Organization and presentation of ideas
  5. Relevance and significance: Importance to the field and broader impact
  6. Ethical considerations: Compliance with research ethics and reporting standards
  7. References and citations: Appropriate acknowledgment of previous work

Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, publication record, and experience in the specific subject area of the manuscript. The Section Editor identifies potential reviewers through:

  1. JOSEIT's reviewer database
  2. Citation analysis of relevant literature
  3. Author suggestions (used selectively and with additional verification)
  4. Editorial board recommendations

We typically assign 2-3 reviewers per manuscript to ensure comprehensive evaluation.

Review Timeframes
JOSEIT is committed to timely processing of manuscripts. Our standard timeframes are:

  • Initial screening: 1-2 weeks
  • Reviewer assignment: 1-2 weeks
  • Review completion: 3-4 weeks
  • Editorial decision: 1-2 weeks after receiving all reviews
  • Total time from submission to first decision: Approximately 6-10 weeks

Decision Categories
Based on reviewer recommendations and editorial assessment, manuscripts receive one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept: Manuscript is accepted in its current form
  2. Minor Revision: Minor changes required before acceptance
  3. Major Revision: Substantial changes required with re-review
  4. Reject: Manuscript is not suitable for publication in JOSEIT

Author Responsibilities During Review
Authors are expected to:

  1. Respond professionally to reviewer comments
  2. Address all concerns raised by reviewers
  3. Provide point-by-point responses to reviewer comments
  4. Submit revised manuscripts within the specified timeframe
  5. Clearly highlight changes made to the manuscript

Ethical Considerations in Peer Review
All participants in the peer review process must adhere to ethical standards including confidentiality, objectivity, and disclosure of conflicts of interest. Reviewers must:

  1. Decline review invitations when conflicts of interest exist
  2. Maintain confidentiality of manuscript content
  3. Provide objective, constructive feedback
  4. Declare any potential competing interests
  5. Complete reviews within agreed timeframes

Appeals Process
Authors may appeal rejection decisions if they believe the review process was fundamentally flawed. Appeals should:

  • Be directed to the Editor-in-Chief
  • Clearly state specific concerns about the review process
  • Provide objective evidence supporting the appeal
  • Be submitted within 30 days of the decision

Continuous Improvement
JOSEIT continuously monitors and improves its peer review process through:

  • Regular feedback collection from authors, reviewers, and editors
  • Analysis of key performance indicators (processing times, reviewer reliability)
  • Implementation of emerging best practices in scholarly publishing
  • Periodic training for editorial board members and reviewers

Recognition of Reviewers
JOSEIT recognizes the invaluable contribution of reviewers through:

  • Annual acknowledgment of reviewers in the journal
  • Certificates of recognition for outstanding reviewers
  • Consideration for editorial board membership
  • Access to reviewer resources and training opportunities

Peer Review Workflow: