Peer Review Process

The Journal of Intelligent Systems Technology and Informatics (JISTICS) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process. This means that both the identities of the authors and the reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This policy ensures impartiality and promotes a high-quality evaluation of manuscripts.

The peer review process typically follows these steps:

  1. Initial Editorial Screening: Upon submission, manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the Editorial Office and the Editor-in-Chief. This stage checks for adherence to the journal's scope, ethical guidelines, formatting requirements, and overall quality. Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be desk-rejected.
  2. Plagiarism Check: All submitted manuscripts are checked using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin, iThenticate). Manuscripts with a similarity index above 20% (excluding references) will not be considered for publication.
  3. Reviewer Assignment: Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic record, diversity, and absence of conflicts of interest.
  4. Peer Review: Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodology, significance of findings, clarity of presentation, and overall contribution to the field. Constructive and evidence-based feedback is provided to help authors improve their work.
  5. Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ recommendations and their own assessment, the Editor-in-Chief makes a decision. Possible decisions include:
    • Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted for publication with no further changes.
    • Minor or Major Revisions: The manuscript requires revisions before reconsideration. Authors are given a specific timeframe (usually 2–4 weeks for minor and 4–8 weeks for major revisions) to resubmit.
    • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial changes and will undergo another round of peer review. A manuscript may undergo a maximum of two rounds of revision.
    • Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to scope mismatch, insufficient quality, ethical concerns, or fundamental flaws.
  6. Author Notification and Revision: Authors are notified of the decision and receive anonymized reviewer comments. For manuscripts requiring revisions, authors must respond to all comments systematically and submit a revised version along with a detailed point-by-point response letter.
  7. Final Decision: Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers or the Editor-in-Chief to ensure that all concerns have been addressed. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance.

This structured and transparent process ensures that only high-quality, relevant, and rigorously researched articles are published in JISTICS.