Editorial process (peer review)

Peer-Review Process

The Journal of Smart Agriculture and Environmental Technology (JOSAET) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of quality through a rigorous, double-blind peer-review process.

What is Double-Blind Peer Review?

In the double-blind review process, both the reviewer and the author remain anonymous to each other. This methodology is designed to eliminate any potential biases that may arise from knowing the identity of the authors or reviewers.

Steps in the Peer-Review Process

  1. Initial Manuscript Evaluation: All submitted manuscripts are initially evaluated by the editorial team for suitability for the journal. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s aims and scope or do not meet basic academic standards will be rejected before review.
  2. Reviewer Assignment: Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation are assigned to at least two external reviewers specialized in the subject matter.
  3. Review: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, methodology, relevance, and presentation. They will recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.
  4. Author Revisions: Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the author may be asked to make revisions to the manuscript.
  5. Final Decision: After revisions are submitted (if required), the editorial team will make the final decision on the manuscript’s publication.
  6. Publication: Accepted articles go through a final round of editing before being published in JOSAET.

Roles and Responsibilities

Authors:

  • Must adhere to the guidelines set forth by the journal.
  • Should respond to reviewers’ comments comprehensively.

Reviewers:

  • Should provide detailed, constructive feedback on submitted manuscripts.
  • Must maintain confidentiality and not disclose any details about the manuscript.

Editorial Team:

  • Is responsible for overseeing the peer-review process.
  • Reserves the right to reject a manuscript at any stage of the process.

Timeframe

The average timeframe for completion of the review process is 4-6 weeks, although this may vary depending on various factors.

For any queries related to the peer-review process, feel free to contact the editorial team.