Peer Review Policy

JSE follows a double blind peer-reviewing policy. All submissions are reviewed internally and externally.

Selection of Peer Reviewers

The selection of reviewers is of greater significance for publishing high-quality papers. JSE selects reviewers keeping their expertise, reputation, experience, and qualifications in mind. The editorial board discourages using those reviewers who do not give potential feedback and specific comments or are slow, non-serious, or biased in any sense. JSE gets reviewers’ consent before sending them papers to them for review.

Steps of Peer Review 

The peer review process begins with editorial triage, where the editorial office first assesses whether the manuscript fits within the journal's scope. Following this, the manuscript is reviewed for adherence to journal guidelines, including formatting, completeness, and required documents. The editor then evaluates the manuscript's novelty and its contribution to the field, along with conducting a quality and plagiarism check. If the manuscript fails to meet these criteria, it may be rejected.

Once a manuscript passes the triage, it is assigned to a Section Editor for internal review, who specializes in the relevant field. This editor conducts an internal review, evaluating the manuscript’s scientific quality, validity, and significance.

During the internal peer review, the Section Editor first ensures that the manuscript aligns with the journal’s standards. Based on their assessment, they decide whether to send the manuscript for external review or reject it. If deemed suitable, the Section Editor selects 2–3 external peer reviewers who are subject-matter experts.

The external peer review phase begins when reviewers are invited and provided access to the manuscript. They evaluate it based on scientific rigor, novelty, accuracy, clarity, and ethical considerations, ultimately submitting their critiques and recommendations.

After receiving the reviewer reports, the Section Editor compiles the feedback and makes a decision, which may include accepting the manuscript, requesting minor or major revisions, or rejecting it.

This decision is forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief (EIC), who makes the final call regarding acceptance, required revisions, or rejection, along with providing feedback to the authors.

If revisions are requested, authors address the comments and resubmit the manuscript, which may undergo another review cycle if significant changes are made. After revisions, the section editor and reviewers assess the changes before making a final recommendation to the EIC, who ultimately decides on publication.

Once accepted, the manuscript moves to copyediting and production, where it is formatted and proofread. Authors have a final opportunity to review proofs before publication. Finally, the manuscript is published online or in print and indexed by relevant databases, completing the peer review process.