Editorial Process (Peer Review)

The Journal of Scientific Research and Technology (JSRT) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and impactful research. This process safeguards the impartiality and confidentiality of both authors and reviewers.

Key Features of the Double-Blind Peer Review Process

  1. Anonymity:

    • Author anonymity: The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.
    • Reviewer anonymity: The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

  2. Objective Evaluation: Manuscripts are assessed based solely on their scholarly merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Peer Review Process

  1. Initial Screening:
    • Submissions are first reviewed by the editorial office to ensure compliance with the journal's aims, scope, and formatting guidelines. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they fail to meet basic requirements or exhibit significant ethical concerns.
  2. Assignment to Reviewers:
    • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected to provide an unbiased and comprehensive assessment.
  3. Reviewer Evaluation:
    • Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for originality, methodology, relevance, clarity, and contribution to the field. They provide detailed feedback and recommendations, including acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.
  4. Editorial Decision:
    • Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editor makes the final decision. In cases of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer may be consulted.
  5. Author Revisions:
    • Authors may be asked to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated to ensure all issues are addressed.
  6. Final Approval:
    • The editor-in-chief makes the final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.

Review Timelines

JSRT aims to complete the peer review process within 1-2 weeks from the date of submission. However, this may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Maintain confidentiality and impartiality.
  • Provide constructive and detailed feedback to enhance the quality of the manuscript.
  • Identify ethical concerns, such as plagiarism or data fabrication, and report them to the editorial team.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a detailed justification. Appeals will be reviewed by the editor-in-chief or an independent expert. The decision made after the appeal process will be final.