Review Process
The International Journal of Research in Communication and Embedded Electronics follows a structured double-blind peer review process to evaluate the originality, technical quality, relevance, and academic integrity of submitted manuscripts. The journal's author guidelines state that manuscripts are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts according to the journal's submission requirements. The manuscript should comply with the journal's formatting, ethical, originality, and structural requirements.
2. Initial Editorial Screening
After submission, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript:
- Falls within the scope of the journal.
- Meets the basic submission requirements.
- Demonstrates sufficient academic and technical quality.
- Follows ethical and originality requirements.
- Is suitable for peer review.
Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be returned to the authors before peer review.
3. Plagiarism Screening
Manuscripts may undergo plagiarism screening using appropriate plagiarism-detection software.
The journal's author guidelines state that manuscripts with more than 10% plagiarism may be automatically rejected.
4. Reviewer Selection
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with relevant expertise.
The journal follows a double-blind review process, and the author guidelines specify review by at least two independent reviewers.
5. Double-Blind Peer Review
Under the double-blind process, the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential as far as practicable.
Reviewers independently assess the manuscript without being influenced by the identity or institutional affiliation of the authors.
6. Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on factors such as:
- Originality and novelty.
- Technical and scientific quality.
- Research methodology.
- Validity of results and analysis.
- Relevance to Electronics and Communication Engineering.
- Quality of figures and tables.
- Clarity of presentation.
- Adequacy of references.
- Overall contribution to the field.
7. Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers may recommend:
- Accept
- Accept with Minor Revisions
- Major Revisions Required
- Revise and Resubmit
- Reject
Reviewer recommendations assist the editorial team but do not by themselves determine the final publication decision.
8. Revision Process
If revisions are required, authors are expected to address the reviewers' comments carefully and submit a revised manuscript.
Authors may also be required to provide a response explaining how the individual reviewer comments have been addressed.
9. Editorial Decision
The editorial team considers the reviewers' assessments, the quality of the revised manuscript, and the journal's academic and ethical requirements before reaching a final decision.
The journal's author guidelines indicate an expected editorial decision timeframe of approximately 4–6 weeks from submission, although the actual timeframe may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.
10. Confidentiality
All manuscripts under review should be treated as confidential. Reviewers and editorial personnel should not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for purposes unrelated to the review process.
