Peer Review Policy

The primary objective of this peer review policy is to ensure the highest standards of academic rigor, originality, and significance in the published research. The policy outlines the procedures for evaluating submitted manuscripts, including the selection of reviewers, the review process, and the decision-making criteria.

Scope:

This policy applies to all original research manuscripts submitted to the Research Corridor Journal of Engineering Science. It does not cover other types of submissions, such as reviews, commentaries, or book reviews.

Peer Review Process:

  1. Initial Screening: All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team to assess their suitability for the journal's scope and quality. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements, such as adherence to the journal's guidelines, will be rejected without review.

  2. Reviewer Selection: For manuscripts that pass the initial screening, the editor-in-chief will select appropriate reviewers based on their expertise in the relevant field, their availability, and their commitment to the peer review process. Reviewers should have a strong academic background and be familiar with the journal's standards.

  3. Review Process: Reviewers will be asked to assess the manuscript's originality, significance, methodology, clarity of presentation, and overall contribution to the field. They will be provided with a review form to guide their evaluation. Reviewers should provide constructive feedback, including suggestions for improvement, if applicable.

  4. Confidentiality: The review process will be conducted in a confidential manner. Reviewers will not be identified to the authors, and their comments will be kept private.

  5. Decision-Making: Based on the reviewers' assessments and the editor-in-chief's evaluation, one of the following decisions will be made:

    • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication in its current form.
    • Accept with Revisions: The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to the incorporation of the reviewers' comments.
    • Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript is returned to the authors for revision and resubmission.
    • Reject: The manuscript is rejected for publication.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

  • Provide a timely and thorough review of the manuscript.
  • Assess the manuscript's originality, significance, methodology, clarity of presentation, and overall contribution to the field.
  • Offer constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement.
  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

Editorial Responsibilities:

  • Ensure the fairness and impartiality of the peer review process.
  • Select qualified reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.
  • Communicate the editorial decisions to the authors in a timely manner.
  • Address any concerns or conflicts of interest that may arise during the review process.

Appeal Process:

Authors who disagree with the editorial decision may submit an appeal to the editor-in-chief. The appeal will be reviewed by a panel of independent experts.

Ethical Considerations:

  • All parties involved in the peer review process must adhere to the highest ethical standards.
  • Plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct will not be tolerated.
  • Conflicts of interest must be declared and addressed appropriately.

This peer review policy is intended to ensure the quality and integrity of the research published in the Research Corridor Journal of Engineering Science. By following these guidelines, the journal aims to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of engineering science.