Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Information Technology, Software Engineering and Computer Science (ITSECS) is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, and rigorous peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated according to their originality, scientific quality, relevance to the journal's scope, methodological soundness, and contribution to information technology, software engineering, and computer science.

Peer Review Policy

1

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose manuscript content or use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

2

Impartiality

Manuscripts are assessed on academic merit and relevance. Reviewers should provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based feedback without discrimination or personal bias.

3

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and decline assignments when their impartiality may be compromised.

4

Research Integrity

Reviewers should report concerns about plagiarism, duplicate publication, data integrity, unethical research practices, or other potential breaches of publication ethics to the editor.

Peer Review Model

The journal uses a peer-review model as specified by its editorial policy. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's originality, research methodology, validity of results, quality of discussion, references, and overall contribution to the field.

Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial decision. The final decision rests with the responsible editor, who considers the reviewers' assessments and the journal's publication standards.

Peer Review Process

STEP 01

Submission Screening

The editorial team checks the manuscript's completeness, scope, formatting, and compliance with the journal's submission requirements. Manuscripts may be returned or rejected at this stage if they do not meet the basic requirements.

STEP 02

Reviewer Assignment

Suitable manuscripts are assigned to reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewer selection considers academic competence, availability, and potential conflicts of interest.

STEP 03

Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers assess the research objectives, originality, methodology, results, discussion, conclusions, references, and relevance to the journal's scope. They provide constructive comments and a recommendation.

STEP 04

Editorial Decision

The editor evaluates the review reports and decides whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. Additional review may be requested when necessary.

Peer Review Timeline

The following stages illustrate the general manuscript evaluation workflow at the Journal of Information Technology, Software Engineering and Computer Science (ITSECS).

1

Submission

Manuscript received

2

Initial Screening

Scope and requirements checked

3

Peer Evaluation

Expert reviews and comments

4

Editorial Decision

Decision communicated to authors

Review Criteria

Reviewers are encouraged to evaluate manuscripts using the following criteria:

  • Originality: The novelty and significance of the research contribution.
  • Relevance: Alignment with the journal's scope and readership.
  • Methodology: Appropriateness, rigor, and clarity of the research methods.
  • Results and Discussion: Validity of findings and quality of interpretation.
  • Presentation: Organization, clarity, language, figures, tables, and references.
  • Ethical Compliance: Appropriate research conduct, citations, permissions, and disclosure of relevant conflicts of interest.

Revision and Resubmission

Authors receiving a revision decision are expected to submit the revised manuscript within 6 weeks, together with a detailed response to the reviewers' comments through the journal submission system.

Authors should address each reviewer comment clearly and indicate the changes made in the revised manuscript. If a suggestion is not adopted, a reasoned explanation should be provided. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

Editorial Decisions

Accept

The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to any final editorial or production requirements.

Minor or Major Revision

The authors must address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised manuscript for further consideration.

Reject

The manuscript is not accepted when it does not meet the journal's quality, relevance, ethical, or publication requirements.

Ethics and Transparency

The Journal of Information Technology, Software Engineering and Computer Science (ITSECS) expects editors, reviewers, and authors to uphold accepted standards of publication ethics. Any concerns about research integrity, plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabricated or manipulated data, or undisclosed conflicts of interest should be communicated to the editorial team.

The editorial team handles such concerns confidentially and takes appropriate action in accordance with the journal's applicable policies and procedures.

Commitment to Fair Peer Review

The Journal of Information Technology, Software Engineering and Computer Science (ITSECS) strives to ensure that every manuscript receives a fair, objective, confidential, and academically rigorous evaluation. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, reviewer assessments, ethical standards, and the journal's publication requirements.