Reviewers are an essential aspect of a scholarly publishing process. The peer-review process is used in ICETIS 2022 to validate scholarly work to improve the quality of published work, increase research community networking. ICETIS 2022 applied a double-blind peer-review process.
A reviewer provides a double-blinded peer-review process of a manuscript to ensure quality publication, which helps the editorial decision-making process. Then, we expect our reviewers to provide timely review reports, being fair and unbiased. The following guidelines are expected from our reviewers in their review process:
- A reviewer provides recommendations on any manuscript received within 14 from the day acknowledgment of the manuscript was received. Otherwise, contact the Editor immediately if the deadline will not be met.
- All communication between the editorial board and the reviewer is confidential. No information will be given to anyone, including the author/s without permission from the Editor or editorial board.
- Your recommendations and comments should be courteous, encouraging, and development-oriented devoid of bias. Also, identify the strength of the manuscript and areas necessary for improvement.
- A reviewer should analyze or evaluate any manuscript based on the following criteria:
- Relevance, scope, and importance of the study to ICETIS,
- Importance of title or topic,
- The originality of the paper (article) and logical flow,
- Literature review quality and citation,
- Quality and use of suitable framework/model/theory (if applicable),
- Quality and use of suitable research design and methodology,
- Quality of analysis and discussion (evidence),
- Quality of organization and presentation
- Contribution to the body knowledge, theory, and practice
- The overall quality of the paper (article) and layout.
- All recommendations and comments are sent to the respective authors, and reviewers are encouraged to be fair, consistent, and correct in their evaluations and comments (report). Use everyday language so that authors can easily understand the comments and suggestions. Avoid criticizing an author on their manuscript.
Peer-review process and steps
- Every paper received is first checked by the respective chairs to determine whether it is suitable for the conference’s scope and quality. The chairs also look at the readability, structure, and grammar before considering it for the peer-review process.
- After the initial assessment, the chairs check for plagiarism.
- Following the plagiarism check, the paper is sent to two or three reviewers for appraisal. Reviewers send back the paper after the appraisal for further processing by the editorial office.
- Once the review process is completed, the editorial chair releases the reports to the author/s. The author/s are requested to respond to reviewers’ comments and suggestions and to effect the necessary corrections. After the authors respond to the reviewers, the paper is resent to the editorial chair for further appraisal and considerations.
- The editorial chair accepts, rejects, or returns the paper to the author effect any minor alternations.
- If the paper is accepted, the author will be requested to submit the final revision of the paper. Before publication, Camera-Ready versions are sent to the authors for confirmation. No further editing will be allowed after confirmation.