Peer Review Process

JANOLI International Journal of Engineering is committed to implementing a fair, transparent, independent, and academically rigorous peer-review process.

Peer review is intended to evaluate the originality, technical quality, methodological rigor, validity, relevance, and clarity of submitted manuscripts.

Stage 1: Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's designated online submission system or official editorial email, following the applicable author guidelines.

The corresponding author must ensure that the manuscript is complete and that all authors approve the submission.

Stage 2: Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial office assesses whether the manuscript fits the journal's scope and satisfies basic submission requirements.

The initial assessment may include:

Relevance to engineering research

Originality and scientific significance

Completeness and presentation quality

Adequacy of methodology and supporting evidence

Compliance with ethical and authorship requirements

Quality of references and supporting materials

Manuscripts that are out of scope, insufficiently developed, or clearly unsuitable may be rejected without external review.

Stage 3: Research Integrity and Similarity Screening

Submissions may be screened using appropriate similarity-detection tools and editorial checks.

Similarity reports must be interpreted in context rather than through a single numerical threshold. Potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, falsified results, inappropriate image manipulation, and other research-integrity concerns should be investigated according to documented editorial procedures.

Stage 4: Independent Expert Review

Manuscripts that pass initial screening are evaluated by independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

The journal should formally adopt and consistently apply a review model, preferably double-anonymous peer review where practicable. In this model, author and reviewer identities are concealed from each other to the extent possible.

Reviewers assess:

Originality and contribution to engineering knowledge

Scientific and technical validity

Appropriateness of experimental, computational, or analytical methods

Reliability of results and interpretation

Adequacy of validation, benchmarking, and uncertainty analysis

Reproducibility and transparency

Relevance of references and engagement with current literature

Clarity, organization, and quality of presentation

Stage 5: Editorial Decision

The responsible editor makes an independent decision after considering the reviewers' reports and the manuscript's overall scientific merit.

Possible decisions include:

Minor revision

Major revision

Reject

Acceptance is based on scholarly quality and compliance with editorial standards. It is not guaranteed by submission, payment, editorial affiliation, or any other non-scholarly consideration.

Stage 6: Revision and Reassessment

Authors may be required to revise their manuscripts and submit a detailed response addressing each reviewer comment.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when further technical assessment is necessary.

Stage 7: Final Acceptance and Publication

Accepted manuscripts undergo appropriate editorial preparation, copyediting, proofreading, reference verification, and metadata checks before publication.

The journal should publish accurate article information, including author details, affiliations, publication dates, abstracts, keywords, references, and persistent identifiers where applicable.

Stage 8: Post-Publication Corrections

The journal should maintain a documented procedure for correcting errors and addressing substantiated concerns after publication. Depending on the circumstances, appropriate actions may include a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction.

Editorial independence and conflicts of interest: Manuscripts authored by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, editorial-board members, or individuals associated with the publisher must be handled by an independent editor with no relevant conflict of interest.

Implementation requirement: The journal should publish only those peer-review procedures, timelines, and review models that it can consistently demonstrate in practice.