Unclear Manuscript Policy

The Journal of Intelligent Systems Technology and Informatics (JISTICS) is committed to publishing high-quality research that is clear, concise, and comprehensible. Effective communication is paramount in scientific dissemination. Therefore, manuscripts submitted to JISTICS are expected to meet acceptable standards of clarity, language, and presentation.

This policy outlines how JISTICS handles manuscripts that are deemed unclear or poorly presented, which may hinder the peer review process or the understanding of the research findings.

1. Definition of an Unclear Manuscript

Manuscripts may be considered unclear if they contain one or more of the following deficiencies:

  • Poor Language Quality: Excessive grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, awkward phrasing, or unclear sentence structures that impede comprehension.
  • Lack of Cohesion: Disjointed sections, illogical flow of arguments, or poor transitions between paragraphs.
  • Ambiguous Methodology: Insufficient detail on research design, data collection, analytical methods, or experimental procedures, making it difficult to understand or replicate the work.
  • Unclear Presentation of Results: Results presented without proper context, poorly labeled tables/figures, or insufficient explanation of findings.
  • Vague Arguments or Conclusions: Lack of a clear problem statement, unfocused research questions, or conclusions not supported by the data.
  • Inconsistent Formatting: Significant deviations from the journal’s official Author Guidelines and template, making the manuscript difficult to read or navigate.

2. Handling of Unclear Manuscripts

2.1. Desk Rejection (Pre-Review Stage)

  • Manuscripts deemed severely unclear during the initial editorial screening (before being sent for peer review) may be desk-rejected by the Editor-in-Chief.
  • Authors will be informed of the decision with a clear explanation of the deficiencies. If the core research is promising, authors may be encouraged to revise and resubmit. Such resubmissions will be treated as new submissions.

2.2. Revisions Required (During or After Peer Review)

  • If an unclear manuscript proceeds to peer review, reviewers may highlight issues related to clarity, language, or presentation.
  • The Editor-in-Chief may issue a decision of "Major Revisions Required" with specific instructions for improving clarity and quality.
  • Failure to adequately address these issues in the revised submission may result in rejection without further review.

2.3. Language Editing Recommendation

  • For manuscripts with language issues, authors may be strongly advised or required to use professional English language editing services before resubmission. JISTICS does not endorse any particular service nor cover the cost. Authors may be required to provide proof of editing upon resubmission.

3. Author Responsibilities

Authors are solely responsible for ensuring the clarity and quality of their manuscript prior to submission. Authors should:

  • Thoroughly proofread the manuscript for grammar, spelling, and readability.
  • Ensure logical flow and coherence of arguments across sections.
  • Strictly follow JISTICS’s Author Guidelines and use the official journal template.
  • If English is not their native language, authors are strongly encouraged to seek review from a native English speaker or professional language editor before submission.

This policy ensures that JISTICS maintains high standards of readability and academic rigor, enabling the dissemination of valuable and comprehensible research to a global audience.