Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

In the review process, the Journal of Computer and Technology involves authors, editors, section editors, and reviewers. To ensure the quality and integrity of the published articles, the Journal strictly applies the Single-Blind Review model. This means that the reviewers are aware of the authors' identities, but the authors do not know the identities of the reviewers, ensuring an objective and unbiased evaluation process.

Review Workflow

1. Initial Screening by Editor

Every incoming manuscript is first checked by the Editor. If the article meets the focus, scope, and writing guidelines of the Journal, the document is forwarded to the reviewers to evaluate the content and novelty. If the manuscript does not meet the criteria, it will be returned to the author with a brief explanation.

2. Peer Review Evaluation

At least two (2) independent reviewers will evaluate each manuscript. The review process takes approximately 1 to 2 weeks. Reviewers assess the manuscript based on the criteria stated in the Article Rating Form for Reviewers, focusing on originality, methodology, clarity, and scientific contribution.

3. Revision and Re-Review

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts based on the feedback and recommendations provided by the reviewers. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the reviewers may request a re-review to ensure that all comments have been adequately addressed.

4. Final Decision

The final decision to accept, reject, or request further revisions for an article is the sole authority of the Editor-in-Chief, based on the comprehensive recommendations provided by the reviewers.

5. Publication Timeline

The manuscript processing and online publication process is conducted efficiently. On average, it takes at least 2 weeks from the final acceptance of the article to its official online publication.

Note: The Journal of Computer and Technology is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics. All reviewers and editors are expected to adhere to the confidentiality and objectivity principles throughout the peer review process. Any conflicts of interest must be disclosed immediately to the Editor-in-Chief.