Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
Journal of Data Science and Informatics Engineering (JoDSIE) applies a rigorous and transparent peer-review process to maintain the quality, originality, methodological soundness, and scholarly contribution of published articles.
Peer Review Policy
JoDSIE uses a double-anonymous peer-review process for research articles. The identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to one another during the review process.
Each research article is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, methodological competence, academic qualifications, and absence of conflicts of interest.
Review Process
Initial Editorial Screening
All submitted manuscripts are first checked by the editorial team for relevance to the journal's scope, originality, completeness, manuscript structure, ethical compliance, authorship information, and basic technical requirements.
Plagiarism and Similarity Screening
Manuscripts may be screened using appropriate similarity detection tools before or during peer review. Similarity results are treated as an editorial screening indicator and are assessed by editors in context; a similarity score alone does not automatically establish plagiarism.
Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers who have appropriate expertise in the subject and methodology of the manuscript. Reviewers are expected to disclose any potential conflict of interest before accepting an assignment.
Double-Anonymous Review
The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed during the review process. Reviewers evaluate manuscripts objectively based on scholarly merit and do not communicate directly with authors through the review process.
Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript in accordance with the journal's scholarly standards, including:
- Originality and relevance of the contribution
- Clarity of the research objectives
- Quality and adequacy of the methodology
- Validity and interpretation of results
- Quality of discussion and scholarly argumentation
- Appropriateness and quality of references
- Clarity, organization, and academic presentation
- Ethical and research integrity considerations
Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers' reports and the overall quality of the manuscript, the editor responsible for the submission makes the editorial decision.
Revision and Final Decision
When revisions are required, authors must respond to the reviewers' comments and submit a revised manuscript within the period specified by the editorial office. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the extent of revision.
Principles of Editorial Decision-Making
Reviewer Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must decline an assignment if they have a personal, professional, financial, institutional, or other relationship that could reasonably affect the impartiality of their review. Reviewers must also maintain confidentiality and must not use unpublished information obtained during peer review for their own advantage.
Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review
Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of manuscripts and should not use generative AI tools to generate or substantively formulate peer-review reports. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and confidentiality of their evaluations.
Exceptions to Peer Review
Research articles published by JoDSIE undergo the peer-review process described above. Editorial materials, announcements, corrections, retractions, and other non-research content may follow an appropriate editorial assessment rather than the full research-article peer-review process. The review status of published content is determined according to its article type and is handled transparently by the editorial office.
Commitment to Rigorous Peer Review
JoDSIE is committed to maintaining an independent, confidential, fair, and academically rigorous peer-review system that supports the integrity and reliability of the scholarly record.
