PEER REVIEW PROCESS

The Journal of System and Computer Engineering (JSCE) applies a structured peer-review process to ensure that submitted manuscripts meet appropriate scientific, technical, and editorial standards.

All manuscripts must first pass the Initial Editorial Validation before being forwarded to peer reviewers. Passing the initial screening does not indicate acceptance for publication.

1. Initial Editorial Validation

After submission, the Editorial Team conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript. This stage includes checking:

• Relevance to the focus and scope of JSCE
• Compliance with the official JSCE template
• Completeness of the manuscript
• General quality of academic writing
• Consistency of figures, tables, citations, and references
• Basic readiness for peer review

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before peer review or may be declined if they are clearly outside the journal's scope.

2. Assignment to Peer Reviewers

Manuscripts that successfully pass the Initial Editorial Validation and complete the applicable administrative process are forwarded to qualified reviewers whose expertise is relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

Reviewers are expected to provide an independent, objective, constructive, and academically responsible evaluation.

3. Reviewer Evaluation

Peer reviewers are generally asked to evaluate the manuscript based on aspects such as:

• Relevance of the research topic
• Clarity of the research problem and objectives
• Scientific or technical contribution
• Appropriateness of the methodology
• Adequacy of data collection and experimental procedures
• Quality of analysis and interpretation
• Consistency between results and conclusions
• Quality and relevance of references
• Clarity of figures and tables
• Overall academic presentation
• Reproducibility and technical clarity, where applicable

Reviewers may also identify ethical, citation, originality, or research-integrity concerns when relevant.

4. Reviewer Recommendation

After completing the evaluation, reviewers may provide recommendations such as:

• Accept Submission
• Revisions Required
• Resubmit for Review
• Decline Submission

Reviewer recommendations serve as important input for the Editorial Team. The final editorial decision is made by the editor based on the reviewer reports, the manuscript revision, and compliance with journal requirements.

5. Revision by Authors

When revisions are required, authors must carefully address the comments provided by the reviewers and editor.

Authors are expected to:

• Revise the manuscript according to the comments received
• Clearly explain the changes made
• Provide appropriate responses to reviewer comments
• Maintain consistency between the revised manuscript and the response document
• Submit the revised manuscript through the existing OJS submission record

Authors should not create a new submission when submitting a revised version unless specifically instructed by the Editorial Team.

6. Re-Review

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated again by the Editorial Team, depending on the extent of the revisions and the reviewers' recommendations.

Additional revision rounds may be required when important issues remain unresolved.

7. Final Editorial Decision

After the review and revision process has been completed, the Editorial Team will make the final decision.

A manuscript may proceed to the Copy Editing stage only after it has satisfactorily completed the peer-review and editorial evaluation process.

Acceptance is based on the scientific and technical quality of the manuscript and its compliance with JSCE publication requirements.

Fast-Track Review

JSCE provides an optional Fast-Track Review service.

The Fast-Track option is intended only to expedite editorial handling and the peer-review process. Manuscripts submitted through Fast-Track are subject to the same review criteria, scientific standards, and editorial requirements as manuscripts processed through the regular review procedure.

Payment of the Fast-Track Review fee does not guarantee acceptance, favorable reviewer comments, or publication. It only provides accelerated processing.

Peer Review Ethics and Confidentiality

Reviewers are expected to:

• Evaluate manuscripts objectively and professionally
• Maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts
• Avoid using unpublished information for personal purposes
• Declare any potential conflict of interest
• Provide constructive and evidence-based comments
• Avoid personal, discriminatory, or inappropriate remarks
• Inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism, duplication, manipulation, or other ethical concerns

Authors should not attempt to contact reviewers directly regarding an active manuscript.

Editorial Independence

The payment of the Article Processing Fee (APC) or Fast-Track Review fee does not influence reviewer recommendations or editorial decisions.

All manuscripts are evaluated based on their academic and scientific merit. If a manuscript is ultimately not accepted after the peer-review and editorial evaluation process, the applicable Article Processing Fee will be handled according to the journal's refund policy.