- Editorial Board
- Aims and Scope
- Peer Review Process
- Publication Ethics
- Open Access Policy
- Plagiarism Policy
- Indexing
- License Term
- Manuscript Template
- Archiving Policy
- Complaints Policy
- Copyright and Licensing Policy
- Correction, Retraction, Withdrawal Policies
- Creative Commons License
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
- Article Processing Charge
- Authors Guidelines
- Reviewer Guidelines
PEER REVIEW POLICY
Process of Peer Review
Iraqi Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research (IJSER) follows a double-blind peer review process to ensure quality, fairness, and integrity.
1
Initial Evaluation & Decision
- The Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor evaluate all submissions to ensure compliance with the Author Guide (format), ethics, and journal scope.
- Submissions that do not meet formatting requirements are returned for correction. Authors have one week to revise and resubmit.
- Submissions that violate ethical policies or are outside the journal scope are rejected without peer review.
- Suitable manuscripts are checked using Turnitin.
✅ If plagiarism is < 20% → proceed to peer review.
❌ If plagiarism is ≥ 20% → reject and return to author for correction.
2
Peer Review (Double-Blind)
Confidentiality: The identities and affiliations of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the double-blind review process.
- After initial screening, the Section Editor delegates the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief.
- The Editor-in-Chief evaluates scientific relevance and selects appropriate reviewers in the manuscript’s subject area.
- The manuscript is assigned to at least two independent experts (may include an editorial board member or a reviewer suggested by authors).
- Reviewers may accept or decline the invitation based on the title and abstract.
- Reviewers submit reports within 2–3 weeks.
Possible Reviewer Recommendations
- Approval
- Acceptance with minor revisions
- Acceptance with major revisions
- Rejection
If reviewer decisions are strongly conflicting, the Editor-in-Chief may assign a third reviewer to support a final decision: accept, modify, or reject.
⏳ Typical review timeline: 6–8 weeks
⛔ Maximum duration: 3 months
Revisions: Corresponding authors must submit the revised manuscript within 2 weeks. Manuscripts submitted after the deadline may be considered withdrawn. Extension requests are acceptable if submitted before the deadline. Authors must address all reviewer comments carefully and explain any disagreements. The Editor-in-Chief forwards the revised manuscript to the Managing Editor for compliance verification.
3
✅ Final Decision
After evaluating all reviewer comments, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:
1) Publication
The manuscript is approved if the Editor-in-Chief recommends “Publish”.
The manuscript is approved if the Editor-in-Chief recommends “Publish”.
2) Accept with minor modifications
Authors revise accordingly and submit the final version. The Editor-in-Chief reviews the revised manuscript and may approve it once satisfied.
Authors revise accordingly and submit the final version. The Editor-in-Chief reviews the revised manuscript and may approve it once satisfied.
3) Major revisions required
Authors resubmit within 2 weeks. The manuscript is typically sent again to the same reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief then decides: Publish, Minor Modifications Required, or Reject.
Authors resubmit within 2 weeks. The manuscript is typically sent again to the same reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief then decides: Publish, Minor Modifications Required, or Reject.
4) Rejection
Rejection may be immediate if the Editor-in-Chief recommends it, or if two reviewers advise rejection. Editors may reject submissions due to lack of originality, inaccurate findings, topical inappropriateness, or insufficient contribution to the field.
Rejection may be immediate if the Editor-in-Chief recommends it, or if two reviewers advise rejection. Editors may reject submissions due to lack of originality, inaccurate findings, topical inappropriateness, or insufficient contribution to the field.
Author Appeals
If a manuscript is rejected, corresponding authors receive the reasons for rejection. Authors who appeal should provide a detailed justification, addressing each reviewer/editor comment. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the appeal with the editorial team and may: accept the submission, request additional peer review, or uphold the rejection. Final rejected decisions are not reversible.
Publishing
Upon acceptance, the Editor-in-Chief sends an acceptance notification to the corresponding authors. Before submission to the publisher, the Technical Editor reviews and formats the manuscript.
