Peer Review Policy

International Journal of Creative and Open Research in Engineering and Management (IJCOPE) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and publishing excellence. Our robust peer review process is fundamental to ensuring the quality, validity, and originality of the research we disseminate. As an open access, international, and multidisciplinary journal, we aim to provide a fair, constructive, and timely review experience for all authors.

1. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

IJCOPE employs a double-blind peer review model. This means that during the review process:

• The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.
• The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

This approach minimizes potential biases related to author reputation, institutional affiliation, geographical location, or any personal factors, ensuring that manuscripts are judged solely on their scholarly merit, scientific rigor, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

2. Peer Review Stages

All submitted manuscripts to IJCOPE undergo a rigorous multi-stage peer review process:

• Initial Editorial Assessment (Internal Review):
  • Upon submission, the Editorial Assistant performs an initial check to ensure the manuscript adheres to the journal’s formatting guidelines, falls within the journal’s aims and scope, and includes all necessary components (e.g., anonymized manuscript, separate title page, declarations).
  • Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using reputable detection software (iThenticate or Plagiarism X Checker). Submissions with unacceptable levels of similarity to previously published works (including the author’s own) will be immediately rejected.
  • Manuscripts that pass this initial check are then forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief.
  • The Editor-in-Chief assesses the manuscript for its originality, significance, overall quality, and suitability for the journal. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable at this stage may be rejected without external peer review.
• Assignment to Section Editor/Associate Editor:
  • If the manuscript passes the initial assessment, the Editor-in-Chief assigns it to a relevant Section Editor or Associate Editor with expertise in the paper’s subject area.
• Inviting Reviewers (External Review):
  • The assigned Associate Editor identifies at least one independent expert reviewer. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic qualifications, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest.
  • Invitations are sent to potential reviewers, including the manuscript’s abstract. Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting the review.
• Conducting the Review:
  • Once reviewers accept, the anonymized manuscript is sent to them.
  • Reviewers are provided with clear guidelines and criteria (e.g., originality, methodology, clarity, significance, contribution to the field, academic rigor, ethics).
  • Reviewers provide constructive, objective feedback and must maintain strict confidentiality.
  • Reviews are expected within 3–5 days. Extensions may be granted upon request.
• Editorial Decision:
  • After reviews are received, the Associate Editor evaluates all feedback.
  • If discrepancies arise or clarification is needed, additional reviewers may be consulted.
  • The Associate Editor recommends a decision to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final call:
    • Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication.
    • Minor Revisions: Requires minor adjustments before acceptance.
    • Major Revisions: Substantial changes are needed and possibly re-review.
    • Reject: Manuscript is not suitable. Clear reasons are provided.
• Communication of Decision:
  • The corresponding author receives the decision and anonymized reviewer comments via email.
  • For revisions, authors receive detailed instructions and must submit a point-by-point response to reviewer comments.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

IJCOPE adheres to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. Reviewers are expected to:

• Confidentiality: Treat all manuscripts as confidential.
• Objectivity and Constructiveness: Provide fair, respectful, and detailed feedback.
• Competence: Accept reviews only if qualified.
• Timeliness: Meet review deadlines or request extensions if necessary.
• Disclosure of Conflicts: Declare any potential conflicts of interest.
• Originality Awareness: Report any overlap with other works.
• Intellectual Property: Do not use manuscript content without written permission.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting to IJCOPE must:

• Anonymize Manuscripts: Remove identifying details from the main file and include a separate title page with author info.
• Originality: Submit original work not under consideration elsewhere.
• Accuracy: Provide accurate results and sufficient detail for replication.
• Timeliness in Revisions: Respond promptly and thoroughly to reviewer comments.
• Conflict Disclosure: Declare any conflicts of interest on the title page.
• Ethical Conduct: Secure ethical approval for studies involving humans or animals, and follow applicable research regulations.

5. Journal’s Commitment

IJCOPE is committed to:

• Clear and transparent peer review guidelines.
• A fair, impartial, and confidential review process.
• Timely editorial decisions and communication.
• Maintaining double-blind anonymity.
• Addressing misconduct per COPE standards.
• Continuously improving peer review practices.

Updated on 07th October, 2025 at 06:30 PM.

For questions regarding the peer review process, contact the Editorial Office at editor@ijmat.org.