Reviewer Guidelines

The International Journal of Research in Communication and Embedded Electronics follows a double-blind peer review process to maintain the quality, originality, technical validity, and academic integrity of published research. Reviewers play an important role in providing independent, constructive, and confidential assessments of submitted manuscripts.

1. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and fairly.
  • Assess the originality and technical quality of the research.
  • Provide constructive and professional comments.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
  • Identify significant methodological or technical concerns.
  • Inform the editorial team of any potential conflict of interest.
  • Submit their review within the agreed timeframe.

2. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers should not:

  • Share the manuscript with others without editorial permission.
  • Discuss the manuscript or its contents with third parties.
  • Use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.
  • Upload confidential manuscript content to external AI systems or other services where confidentiality could be compromised.

3. Double-Blind Review

The journal follows a double-blind peer review process, meaning that the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process as far as practicable.

Reviewers should therefore avoid attempting to identify the authors and should focus their assessment on the manuscript itself.

4. Reviewer Expertise

Reviewers should accept assignments only when the manuscript falls within their area of knowledge and expertise.

Relevant areas may include:

  • Electronics and Communication Engineering.
  • Embedded systems.
  • Communication systems.
  • Electronic systems and devices.
  • Signal and image processing.
  • Wireless and digital communication.
  • Computer and electronic engineering.
  • Related interdisciplinary technologies.

5. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should consider the following aspects:

Originality

  • Is the research sufficiently original?
  • Does it provide a meaningful contribution to the field?

Technical Quality

  • Are the methodology and technical approach appropriate?
  • Are the experiments, simulations, or analyses adequately described?

Results and Discussion

  • Are the results clearly presented?
  • Are the conclusions supported by the evidence?
  • Is the discussion technically sound?

Presentation

  • Is the manuscript clearly organized?
  • Are figures and tables appropriate and understandable?
  • Are references relevant and adequately cited?

Relevance

  • Does the manuscript fit the scope of the International Journal of Research in Communication and Embedded Electronics?

6. Ethical Review

Reviewers should alert the editorial team if they identify possible:

  • Plagiarism.
  • Duplicate publication.
  • Fabricated or manipulated data.
  • Serious ethical concerns.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  • Suspicious or inappropriate citations.

Reviewers should not make accusations directly to authors without appropriate evidence; concerns should be communicated confidentially to the editor.

7. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a manuscript for review.

A reviewer should decline the assignment when a personal, professional, institutional, financial, competitive, or collaborative relationship could affect their impartiality.

8. Reviewer Comments

Reviewer comments should be:

  • Clear and specific.
  • Constructive and respectful.
  • Based on academic and technical considerations.
  • Helpful to authors in improving the manuscript.

Personal criticism or offensive language should be avoided.

9. Recommendation

After evaluating the manuscript, reviewers may recommend:

  • Accept
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions Required
  • Revise and Resubmit
  • Reject

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team.

10. Revisions

When revisions are requested, reviewers may be invited to assess the revised manuscript to determine whether the authors have adequately addressed the previous comments.

Reviewers should focus on whether the revised manuscript has satisfactorily responded to the identified academic and technical concerns.