Peer Review Policy - International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology
ISSN: 0974-3154
The International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT) follows a peer-review process intended to provide an independent and objective assessment of submitted manuscripts and to support the quality, integrity, and scholarly relevance of published research.
1. Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts received by IJERT are subject to an initial editorial assessment before being sent for peer review.
The editorial assessment considers, among other relevant factors:
whether the manuscript falls within the scope of IJERT;
whether the submission satisfies the journal's basic manuscript and formatting requirements;
whether the work presents an appropriate scholarly contribution;
whether there are apparent concerns regarding originality, ethical compliance, or publication integrity.
Manuscripts that are clearly outside the scope of the journal or that do not meet the basic requirements for consideration may be declined without external peer review.
2. Originality and Exclusive Submission
A manuscript submitted to IJERT must not be under simultaneous consideration by another journal.
Authors are expected to notify the editorial office of any relevant prior publication, related manuscript, or overlapping submission. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is not acceptable.3. Selection of Reviewers
Manuscripts considered suitable for peer review are evaluated by appropriately qualified reviewers selected on the basis of their subject expertise and the requirements of the manuscript.
IJERT normally seeks evaluations from two independent reviewers, although the number of reviewers may be increased where the Editor considers additional assessment necessary.
The selection of reviewers is an editorial responsibility. Authors may provide suggestions concerning potential reviewers, but the final selection rests with the journal.4. Independence and Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers and editors involved in the assessment of a manuscript are expected to disclose any relationship or circumstance that could reasonably affect, or be perceived to affect, the impartiality of their assessment.
A reviewer should decline an invitation where a conflict of interest could prevent an objective evaluation. Relevant conflicts may include close personal or professional relationships, collaboration with the authors, institutional relationships, direct academic competition, financial interests, or other circumstances that could reasonably compromise impartiality.Editors should likewise recuse themselves from editorial decisions where a conflict of interest exists.
5. Confidentiality
Manuscripts submitted to IJERT are treated as confidential scholarly documents.
Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose information concerning a submitted manuscript, its contents, its review status, reviewer reports, or the editorial decision to persons who are not authorized to receive such information.
Reviewers must not use, reproduce, distribute, or otherwise make use of unpublished information contained in a manuscript for personal, professional, or competitive purposes.
Reviewers should not retain copies of manuscripts or associated confidential material after completing the review, except where retention is required by the journal's procedures or applicable requirements.6. Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
assess manuscripts objectively and independently;
provide constructive, reasoned, and professional comments;
evaluate the manuscript on the basis of its scholarly content rather than the identity, nationality, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics of the authors;
identify relevant weaknesses, methodological concerns, or unsupported conclusions;
identify significant relevant published work that may have been overlooked where appropriate;
disclose any potential conflict of interest;
maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and review process; and
complete reviews within the agreed period or promptly inform the editorial office if they are unable to do so.
Reviewers should not use unpublished information or ideas obtained through peer review for personal advantage or competitive purposes.
7. Use of Artificial Intelligence and Other Tools in Peer Review
Because submitted manuscripts contain confidential and unpublished material, reviewers must not upload manuscripts or confidential manuscript content to external artificial-intelligence systems or other third-party tools where confidentiality cannot be assured.
Where a reviewer intends to use any technological or automated assistance in preparing a review, the reviewer should comply with the journal's instructions concerning confidentiality and seek permission from the editorial office where required.8. Review Process and Editorial Decision
The peer-review process provides advice to the Editor regarding the scholarly suitability of a manuscript. Reviewer recommendations are considered together with the manuscript, the reviewers' comments, and the journal's editorial requirements.The possible editorial decisions include:
Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject
The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor makes the final editorial decision. A manuscript is not accepted solely because it has received favorable reviewer recommendations, nor is a particular reviewer recommendation necessarily determinative of the final decision.
9. Revision of Manuscripts
Where revision is requested, authors should respond to the reviewers' comments carefully and provide a clear explanation of the changes made. A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or to additional reviewers where the editor considers further assessment necessary. Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.10. Additional Review
The editorial office may seek additional peer-review reports where the manuscript requires further specialist assessment, where reviewer recommendations differ substantially, or where clarification is necessary before an editorial decision can be reached. Additional review may also be undertaken when new issues arise during revision or editorial assessment.11. Reviewer Anonymity
IJERT follows a confidential peer-review process in which reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors unless the journal expressly states otherwise. Reviewers should not identify themselves to authors through the review comments or through direct communication concerning the manuscript. The journal may disclose reviewer information where required by law, by an applicable ethical investigation, or with the reviewer's consent.12. Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are based on the journal's scope, scholarly standards, originality, methodological and technical quality, significance of the contribution, and the outcome of the editorial and peer-review process.
Editorial decisions should not be influenced by commercial interests, personal relationships, or other considerations unrelated to the scholarly evaluation of the manuscript.13. Appeals and Complaints
Authors who believe that a significant error has occurred in the editorial or peer-review process may submit a reasoned appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. An appeal should identify the specific grounds for reconsideration and should not merely disagree with the scientific judgment of the reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief may review the appeal, seek clarification from the handling editor or reviewers, or obtain an additional independent assessment where appropriate. The decision following an appeal will normally be final. Complaints concerning editorial conduct, publication ethics, conflicts of interest, or other aspects of the publication process should be submitted to the editorial office with sufficient information to permit appropriate consideration.14. Confidentiality and Use of Information
Information obtained during peer review must be treated as privileged information. Reviewers and editors must not use unpublished findings, data, methods, or ideas obtained through the review process for their own research or competitive advantage before the work has been publicly published.
The confidentiality of authors and reviewers will be maintained throughout the review process, subject to circumstances in which disclosure is necessary for the investigation of suspected misconduct, required by law, or otherwise permitted under applicable publication-ethics procedures.
IRPH Vision Map | Journals | Books | Indexing Information | Editorial Diversity | Contact Us | Archiving Information
© 2026 International Research Publication House. All Rights Reserved.
