Peer Review Policy
All submissions to PakJET are first reviewed for completeness and then sent for assessment by an editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. The journal staff and in-house editorial team perform an initial quality check to identify potential issues such as (1) competing interests, (2) compliance with editorial policies and ethical standards, (3) financial disclosures, and data availability. A Turnitin report is also generated to check whether the similarity index matches the allowed limit. Submissions may be returned to authors for changes or clarifications at this stage.
After completing internal checks, each new submission is assigned to an Academic/Section Editor with relevant expertise. The editor reviews the manuscript against our publication criteria and determines whether reviews from additional experts are needed to evaluate the manuscript. During the submission process, the author is asked to indicate any specific editors or reviewers who should not review your manuscript. We respect the request so long as it does not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission. The handling editor selects reviewers based on expertise, publication history, and past reviews and invites them to provide feedback on the manuscript. After agreeing to review, external peer reviewers are requested to submit their review as soon as possible (typically two weeks). The journal office follows up with late reviewers and keeps the authors informed if there are any delays.
PakJET uses single-anonymized peer review (Anonymous Reviewer/Disclosed Author). Reviewers remain anonymous unless they choose to identify themselves by signing their name to their review in our submission system.
The handling Academic Editor or staff editor makes the final decision on each manuscript. At least two reviewers' reports are required to make a decision. The editor considers the reviewer's feedback and their own evaluation of the manuscript in order to reach a decision. Editors will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision, but they are not bound by the opinions or recommendations therein. A concern raised by a single peer reviewer or the Editor themself may result in the manuscript being rejected. The following decision types are available:
- Accept Submission
- Revisions Required
- Resubmit for Review
- Resubmit Elsewhere
- Decline Submission
Decisions are communicated to the corresponding author in a formal letter (via email), along with reviewer feedback and any other requirements from the journal office.
If the editor feels that your manuscript has the potential to be published but requires changes, the authors are invited to revise it. They will have preferably two to resubmit the revised manuscript for both a major or a minor revision.
In most cases, the revised manuscript is re-assigned to the original Academic/Section Editor. The editor may make a new decision based on their own assessment of the revised manuscript and the authors’ response to reviewers or request additional input from external peer reviewers.
