Double Blind Peer Reviewer

It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our referees, therefore, play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Journal and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Scientific Hub of Applied Research in Engineering & Information Technology conducts double-blind peer review process. Manuscripts are initially examined by the editorial staff. If the manuscript meets the author’s guidelines, the Editor in Chief is responsible for finding appropriate reviewers for a manuscript. For each paper that the Editor-in-Chief assigns, the transactions assistant will send the editor a letter requesting that he/she handle the review process of the paper. Editors should assign at least two independent reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief ensures sending the manuscripts to reviewers without any authors’ identification, including authors’ names and affiliations. The reviewers should not identify themselves or their organizations within the review text.

The invitation to review a manuscript is send by an e-mail. The reviewers must be specialists in the field. After acceptance, the reviewers should complete the review by the specified due date. The reviewers are kindly asked to contact us if they need to extend the deadline. If the reviewers have differing opinions, then the text is sent to a third reviewer. The Editor-in-Chief will take a decision on the disposition of the manuscript, based on remarks of the reviewers. The editor's recommendation must be well justified and explained in detail. In cases where the revision is requested, these should be clearly indicated and explained. The editor must then promptly convey this decision to the author. The author may contact the editor if instructions regarding amendments to the manuscript are unclear. The manuscripts are accepted only after receiving two positive reviews from the anonymous reviewers. The guidelines of decisions for publication are as follows:

An accept decision means accepting the paper by incorporating the suggested modifications (if any). The paper will not be seen again by the reviewers subjected to all the stated corrections were carried out in the revised submission which will be ensured by the editor.

A reject decision means that the manuscript is not suitable for publication in our Journal. This decision can be taken either by the editor if the research area is out of the Journal scope or by the reviewer if the research work mentioned in the manuscript is flawed.

The paper is conditionally accepted with some requirements. A revision means that the paper should go back to the original reviewers for a second round of reviews once the first revision has been carried out by the author untill it receives an accept decision.

For Authors and Reviewers

Reviewer will perform the paper review based on the main criteria provided here. Please provide detailed public comments for each criterion, also available to the author.

  • How this manuscript advances this field of research and/or contributes something new to the literature?

  • Is the paper clearly written and well organized?

  • Are all figures and tables appropriately provided and are their resolution good quality?

  • Does the introduction state the objectives of the manuscript encouraging the reader to read on?

  • Are the references relevant and complete? Supply missing references if any.

Please supply any information that you think will be useful to the author in revision for enhancing quality of the paper or for convincing him/her of the mistakes.