Editorial Policies

The Journal of Engineering Research and Reviews (JERR) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly publishing, research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, and fairness. The journal's editorial policies are designed to ensure that manuscripts are evaluated objectively and that published research meets appropriate standards of scientific and ethical quality.

1. Editorial Decision-Making

1.1. Editorial Independence

The Journal of Engineering Research and Reviews maintains editorial independence in all decisions concerning the evaluation, revision, acceptance, and rejection of manuscripts.

Editorial decisions are based primarily on the scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, significance, and clarity of the submitted work. Editorial decisions are not influenced by commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, authors' ability to pay publication charges, nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, race, religion, political views, or other non-scientific considerations.

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for maintaining the academic and editorial integrity of the journal and for ensuring that editorial decisions are made in accordance with the journal's policies.

1.2. Fair and Unbiased Evaluation

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated fairly and objectively.

Editors consider the scientific and scholarly merits of each manuscript and ensure that manuscripts are handled without discrimination or inappropriate bias. Editors may decline to consider manuscripts that are outside the scope of the journal, fail to meet minimum scientific or technical requirements, or do not comply with the journal's ethical and submission requirements.

2. Peer Review Process

2.1. Peer Review Model

The Journal of Engineering Research and Reviews follows a double-blind peer review model.

In the double-blind peer review process, the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors throughout the review process.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are normally sent to independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant field.

2.2. Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment before external peer review.

The assessment may include consideration of:

• the relevance of the manuscript to the scope of JERR;

• originality and potential contribution to the field;

• scientific and methodological quality;

• compliance with the journal's Instructions for Authors;

• ethical and research integrity requirements;

• completeness of the submitted files and required declarations; and

• potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other forms of publication misconduct.

A manuscript may be rejected without external peer review when it is outside the journal's scope or does not meet the journal's minimum scientific, ethical, or editorial requirements.

2.3. External Peer Review

Manuscripts considered suitable for external evaluation are normally reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

Reviewers are selected according to their subject expertise and their ability to provide an objective and independent assessment. The journal may seek additional reviewers when necessary, including when reviewer recommendations substantially conflict or when specialized expertise is required.

Reviewer recommendations are considered together with the editor's own assessment of the manuscript. A recommendation to accept a manuscript does not automatically result in acceptance.

2.4. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

• evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively;

• assess the scientific validity, originality, methodology, interpretation, and significance of the work;

• identify important weaknesses or concerns in the manuscript;

• identify relevant published work that should be considered or cited, where appropriate;

• maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts under review;

• disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest;

• decline an invitation when they do not have sufficient expertise or cannot provide an impartial assessment; and

• refrain from using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

2.5. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to JERR are treated as confidential documents during the editorial and peer review process.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose information concerning submitted manuscripts to individuals who are not directly involved in the editorial process.

The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors in accordance with the journal's double-blind peer review policy.

2.6. Editorial Decisions

Following editorial assessment and peer review, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

• Accept

• Minor Revision

• Major Revision

• Reject

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to respond to reviewers' comments clearly and provide a description of the changes made to the manuscript.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

2.7. Timeliness

JERR aims to conduct the editorial and peer review process efficiently while maintaining the quality and integrity of the evaluation.

The journal seeks to minimize unnecessary delays and encourages editors and reviewers to complete their responsibilities within reasonable timeframes. However, review times may vary depending on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, and the need to obtain additional assessments.

3. Research Integrity and Publication Ethics

3.1. Research Integrity

Authors are expected to conduct and report their research responsibly, accurately, and transparently.

Manuscripts must present research honestly and must not contain fabricated, falsified, manipulated, or misleading data or results.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the methodology, results, interpretations, and conclusions are accurately reported and appropriately supported.

JERR follows recognized principles of publication ethics and research integrity and may investigate suspected breaches of publication ethics or research misconduct.

3.2. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must be based on substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions to the research and manuscript.

All individuals listed as authors must have made meaningful contributions to the work, participated in the preparation or critical revision of the manuscript, approved the final version, and accepted responsibility for the integrity of the work.

Individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors. Where appropriate, their contributions may be acknowledged separately.

All authors are responsible for ensuring that the author list accurately reflects contributions to the work.

3.3. Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be accompanied by a clear explanation and confirmation from all affected authors.

The journal may require written agreement from all authors before approving a change in authorship.

Authorship changes after publication are considered only in exceptional circumstances and may require a formal correction to the published record.

3.4. Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, personal, professional, institutional, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.

Editors and reviewers must also disclose potential conflicts of interest and should not participate in the evaluation of a manuscript when a conflict could compromise their impartiality.

The existence of a disclosed conflict of interest does not necessarily prevent publication; however, it must be appropriately declared and managed.

3.5. Plagiarism and Similarity

JERR does not accept plagiarism, including the unauthorized use of another person's ideas, words, data, figures, or other intellectual material without appropriate attribution.

Submitted manuscripts are screened using plagiarism or similarity-detection software "iThenticate".

Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team in context. A similarity percentage alone does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred.

Where plagiarism, substantial unattributed copying, or other forms of academic misconduct are identified, the journal may reject the manuscript or take appropriate post-publication action in accordance with the circumstances.

3.6. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Manuscripts submitted to JERR must not have been published previously in substantially the same form and must not be under consideration by another journal simultaneously.

Authors must disclose any closely related publications, submissions, conference papers, preprints, or other materials that could create concerns about duplicate or redundant publication.

4. Manuscript Preparation and Submission

Authors must follow the journal's current Instructions for Authors when preparing and submitting manuscripts.

Manuscripts should be prepared clearly and accurately and should contain sufficient methodological information to allow readers to understand and, where applicable, reproduce the research.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information provided during submission, including author details, affiliations, acknowledgements, funding information, conflict-of-interest declarations, ethical statements, and other required disclosures.

5. Transparency and Open Science

5.1. Data Availability and Reproducibility

JERR encourages authors to make research data, analytical methods, software, code, protocols, and other supporting materials available whenever appropriate and ethically and legally possible.

Authors should provide sufficient methodological information to support transparency and reproducibility.

Where research data cannot be publicly shared because of ethical, legal, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, or other legitimate restrictions, authors should provide an appropriate explanation and, where possible, indicate how qualified researchers may obtain access.

5.2. Research Materials and Code

Where applicable, authors are encouraged to make relevant research materials, datasets, computer code, analytical scripts, and other supporting resources available through appropriate repositories.

Any shared materials should be accompanied by sufficient information to enable their appropriate interpretation and reuse.

5.3. Post-Publication Discussions

JERR supports constructive post-publication discussion concerning published research.

Readers and researchers who identify substantive concerns regarding a published article are encouraged to communicate these concerns to the journal through the appropriate editorial contact channels.

The journal may investigate credible concerns and, where necessary, publish corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other notices to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

6. Corrections and Retractions

JERR is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the published scholarly record.

When an error or issue is identified after publication, the journal may publish an appropriate correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction depending on the nature and significance of the issue.

Corrections and retractions are linked to the original article whenever technically possible, and the original publication record is maintained to preserve transparency.

7. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual error, misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or undisclosed conflict of interest materially affected the decision.

Appeals must provide a clear and reasoned explanation addressing the specific grounds for the appeal. Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately designated editor.

Complaints concerning editorial processes, publication ethics, or journal procedures should be submitted to the journal through its official editorial contact channels.

The journal will consider complaints and appeals fairly and confidentially and will take appropriate action when a legitimate concern is identified.

8. Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI

Authors must disclose the use of generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation when such use has materially contributed to the submitted work.

AI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, or accountability of scholarly work.

Authors remain fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, including any text, data interpretation, references, images, or other material produced or assisted by AI tools.

The use of AI or AI-assisted technologies must not replace the authors' responsibility for critical evaluation and verification of the submitted content.

9. Editorial Board Responsibilities

Members of the JERR Editorial Board are expected to:

• maintain confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts;

• make editorial decisions fairly and independently;

• manage conflicts of interest appropriately;

• support rigorous and ethical peer review;

• protect the integrity of the published scholarly record; and

• comply with the journal's publication ethics and research integrity policies.

Editorial Board members must not use unpublished information obtained through their editorial responsibilities for personal or professional advantage.

10. Continuous Review of Editorial Policies

JERR periodically reviews its editorial policies and procedures to ensure that they remain consistent with recognized standards of scholarly publishing and research integrity.

Policy updates are made when necessary to reflect developments in publishing practices, research ethics, peer review, open science, and applicable standards.

The journal seeks to maintain transparent and responsible relationships among authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other members of the scholarly community.

11. Commitment to Scholarly Integrity

Through these editorial policies, the Journal of Engineering Research and Reviews is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, independent, and rigorous editorial process.

The journal's policies apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and other participants in the publication process and are intended to protect the integrity, reliability, and accessibility of the scholarly record.