Peer Review Policy and Process for EIJET

The peer review process is a crucial step in ensuring the quality and validity of research articles. While specific steps may vary slightly between journals, the general process typically involves the following:

Peer Review Policy:

• Double-Blind Review:EIJET follows a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartial and unbiased evaluation. This process maintains anonymity for both authors and reviewers, promoting objectivity in the assessment.
• Initial Communication:Authors receive an acknowledgment of their manuscript submission within 7 days of the receipt of the Manuscript.
• Review Period:The typical peer review process takes 8 to 12 weeks, although the timeframe may vary depending on reviewer availability and agreements. For any process delay, the authors will be promptly informed of any delays or changes to the expected timeline.
• Editorial Oversight: The journal Editorial Board maintains overall editorial leadership and responsibility for the review process. The Editor-in-Chief assumes primary responsibility for:
• Overseeing the entire review process.
• Ensuring consistency, fairness, and integrity throughout the review process.
• Maintaining editorial standards and guidelines.
• Resolving any conflicts or issues that may arise during the review process.
• Representing the journal to the scholarly community.
• Ethical Compliance: All manuscripts submitted to the journal must follow the highest standards of ethical research conduct. For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors are required to obtain and provide ethical clearance (certificate or documentation of ethical approval) from a recognized institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee. For research involving human participants, obtaining informed consent is mandatory. This includes ensuring participants understand the study's purpose, potential risks and benefits, and their right to withdraw from the study at any time. Failure to comply with ethical guidelines will result in the rejection of the manuscript.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers and authors are obligated to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may arise during the submission or peer-review process. This includes any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could potentially bias their judgment. The journal maintains transparency in handling all potential conflicts of interest, ensuring that the peer-review process remains objective and impartial.
• Corrections and Retractions: The journal follows a transparent process for correcting or retracting published articles in the event of significant post-publication issues, such as errors or ethical concerns. Authors or readers may submit requests for corrections if they identify any mistakes or inconsistencies in a published article.

Peer Review Process:

Submission: The author submits the manuscript to the journal's online submission system.

Initial Screening: Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening process. The editorial team evaluates the manuscript to determine its suitability for the journal. The editorial office checks the manuscript to match the journal's themes, guidelines, formatting, and citation style. This assessment ensures that the manuscript:

• Meets the journal's academic standards and quality criteria.
• Aligns with the journal's scope and thematic focus.

Assignment to Editor-in-Chief: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript's suitability for the journal, considering its scope, originality, and overall quality. The manuscript may be rejected at this stage if it is deemed unsuitable. Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are forwarded to the next process of the reviewer’s assignment.

Assignment of Reviewers: The Editor-in-Chief together with Associate Editor (or a similar role) oversees the peer review process for checking the level of plagiarism (optional). The handling editor (Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor) identifies and assigns potential reviewers who are experts in the relevant field and maintains the record. Typically, at least two independent reviewers for each manuscript are selected.

Review Process Guidelines: Reviewers follow a set of standardized guidelines provided by the journal. These guidelines outline the key criteria for evaluation, including the manuscript's originality, methodological rigor, clarity of writing, relevance to the field, and contribution’s novelty to the scientific community.

Decision Based on Reviews: After receiving the reviews, the editors will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication with no revisions.
• Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor changes before it can be accepted. Authors are expected to make the requested revisions and resubmit the revised manuscript for final approval.
• Major Revision: Major changes are required. The manuscript will be sent for a second round of review to the reviewers after revisions are made.
• Reject: The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication in its current form due to quality concerns or lack of fit with the journal’s scope.

Post-Review Author Notification: After the review, the editorial team will send detailed feedback to the authors, including the reviewer’s comments and the editor's decision. Authors are expected to address all feedback thoroughly during the revision process. Any further clarifications or responses to reviewer comments should be documented.

Language Editor: Now, if the manuscript is accepted then the author’s revised version of the manuscript is assigned to the language editor for language and format editing. The Managing Editor collaborates with an English-language editor to prepare the final version, ensuring clarity, consistency, and standards to the journal's formatting and language standards.

Manuscript Progress Tracking: Authors will be able to track the progress of their manuscript throughout the review process. The journal provides an online system that allows authors to monitor the status of their submission, from initial submission through peer review to final acceptance and publication.

Final Version of Paper Preparation: Once a manuscript is edited by the language editor, the finalized version copy of the paper is then rechecked by the editor-in-chief and associate editor-in-chief rigorously for the final publication.