Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

1. Type of review

IJCIE operates double-anonymised (double-blind) peer review. The identities of the authors are withheld from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are withheld from the authors. Reviewer identities are known only to the handling editor and the editorial office and are never disclosed to the authors.

2. Who is reviewed

Every submission that passes editorial screening is peer reviewed, regardless of article type: original research, review articles, technical notes and case studies. Editorials and announcements are not peer reviewed and are labelled as such.

3. Screening before review

Before a manuscript is sent to reviewers, the editorial office verifies scope, completeness, template compliance, declarations and ethical approvals, and runs a Turnitin similarity check together with AI-content screening. Manuscripts failing this stage are desk-rejected, normally within seven days of submission.

4. Number of reviewers

At least two independent external reviewers assess each manuscript. Where the two reports conflict materially, the handling editor obtains a third review before deciding. Reviewers are chosen for subject expertise; they must not be from the same institution as any author, must not have co-authored with any author recently, and must declare any other competing interest before accepting.

5. Review period

Reviewers are asked to return a report within four weeks. Reviewers who cannot meet this period are asked to decline immediately so that the manuscript can be reassigned.

6. What reviewers assess

Originality and significance; technical correctness; adequacy of experimental design, datasets, baselines and metrics; whether conclusions follow from the evidence; reproducibility; quality of figures, tables and referencing; ethical compliance; and clarity of English. Reviewers give a recommendation of accept, minor revision, major revision or reject, together with confidential comments to the editor and detailed comments to the authors.

7. Decision

The handling editor takes the decision. Reviewer recommendations are advisory: the editor weighs the arguments rather than counting votes. Authors receive the decision with the complete anonymised reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts must be accompanied by a point-by-point response; major revisions are normally returned to the original reviewers.

8. Number of rounds

There is no fixed limit, but a manuscript that has not reached an acceptable standard after two rounds of major revision is normally rejected.

9. Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewers may not share, distribute or retain them, may not use their content, and may not upload them to any external generative AI service. Breach of confidentiality is reported to the reviewer's institution.

10. Editors as authors

When an editor or board member submits to IJCIE, the manuscript is handled by an independent editor, the submitting editor has no access to the file, and the arrangement is stated in the published article.

11. Reviewer suggestions and exclusions

Authors may suggest reviewers and may request exclusions with reasons. The handling editor is not bound by either and always includes reviewers not proposed by the authors. Suggested reviewers whose identity or independence cannot be verified are not used.

12. Records

Correspondence, reports and decisions are retained in the journal's system for at least five years and are available to an investigation into research or publication misconduct.