Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy – JECIR

The Journal of Engineering and Computational Intelligence Review (JECIR) is committed to maintaining the highest standards in academic publishing. Peer review plays a critical role in ensuring the quality, integrity, and originality of the scholarly content we publish. All manuscripts submitted to JECIR undergo a structured double-blind peer review process as outlined below.

1. Initial Manuscript Evaluation

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by one of the Chief Editors to determine its suitability for further review. Submissions may be rejected at this stage if they:

• Lack sufficient originality or relevance
• Contain major scientific or methodological flaws
• Are poorly written or outside the journal's scope

Manuscripts that pass this initial screening are sent for full peer review. Authors are usually notified of a desk rejection within two weeks of submission.

2. Type of Peer Review

JECIR follows a double-blind peer review model:

• Reviewers remain anonymous to authors
• Authors remain anonymous to reviewers
  This ensures an unbiased evaluation based solely on the quality and content of the manuscript.

3. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise relevant to the manuscript. While author-suggested reviewers are welcome, the final selection is at the discretion of the editorial team and is non-binding.

4. Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers assess manuscripts on the following criteria:

• Originality and innovation in methodology, theory, or application
• Scientific rigor and appropriateness of methods
• Clarity and strength of results and conclusions
• Relevance and completeness of literature citations
• Adherence to ethical and academic integrity, including plagiarism standards
• Contribution to the advancement of engineering and computational knowledge

Reviewers may also provide suggestions for language and stylistic improvements, although final language review is managed by the editorial team.

5. Duration of the Review Process

• The first round of peer review typically takes 2 to 4 weeks
• In case of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer may be consulted
• In rare cases, a manuscript may be accepted or rejected based on one comprehensive review, if a second reviewer cannot be secured

Authors will receive detailed editorial decisions, including reviewer comments, and may be asked to revise the manuscript accordingly. Revised manuscripts are often sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation.

6. Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision to accept, reject, or request further revisions, based on the reviewers’ recommendations and editorial judgment. This decision is final and binding.