Peer Review Process

The Indian Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET), published by PhD Kro, India, follows a double-anonymous peer review process to maintain fairness, confidentiality, and academic integrity. Under this system, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. Every submission undergoes preliminary editorial screening for originality, relevance, technical quality, and compliance with publication ethics. Manuscripts meeting these requirements are evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.

Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on originality, scientific accuracy, methodological soundness, technical relevance, clarity, and contribution to existing knowledge. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and disclose potential conflicts of interest. Their recommendations guide editorial decisions, while final academic responsibility remains with the authorized editor.

Editorial Decisions and Revisions

Following peer review, manuscripts may be accepted, rejected, or returned for minor or major revisions. Authors invited to revise must submit an updated manuscript with a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may undergo further assessment where necessary. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit and remain independent of publication charges or commercial considerations.

Editorial Ethics and Confidentiality

IJET maintains confidentiality throughout manuscript evaluation. Editors and reviewers must avoid conflicts of interest and protect unpublished research. Submissions from Editorial Board members or individuals associated with the publisher are handled by independent editors. Special-issue research articles follow the same peer review standards as regular submissions. Authors may appeal editorial decisions through a reasoned written request, which is independently assessed where practicable.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Manuscript Submission

   Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s official online submission system.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

   The editorial team checks scope, originality, completeness, and ethical compliance. Unsuitable manuscripts may be rejected or returned without external review.

3. Independent Peer Review

   Suitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent external reviewers under the double-anonymous review model.

4. Editorial Evaluation

   The handling editor examines reviewer reports and determines whether the manuscript requires revision, further review, acceptance, or rejection.

5. Revision and Reassessment

   Where revisions are requested, authors submit a revised manuscript and responses to reviewer comments. The editor may seek additional reviews before reaching a final decision. This step is skipped when no revision is required.

6. Final Editorial Decision

   The authorized academic editor communicates the final acceptance or rejection decision based on scholarly quality and review findings. Rejected manuscripts do not proceed to publication formalities.

7. Publication Formalities

   Following acceptance, authors complete the copyright agreement, applicable publication payments, and required production formalities before publication.

Review Timeline and Transparency

The duration of peer review depends on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, and the extent of revisions required. The journal does not guarantee acceptance or publication within a fixed period. Editorial decisions, reviewer reports, and revision records are maintained confidentially to support accountability and responsible editorial practice.