Peer Review Guidelines

The International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Advanced Applications (IJETAA) is dedicated to publishing high-quality research in the fields of emerging technologies, advanced applications, and interdisciplinary innovations. Our peer review process ensures that all submitted manuscripts meet the highest standards of scientific rigor and relevance. This document outlines the peer review guidelines for IJETAA, covering criteria such as relevance, content quality, and overall presentation.

Scope of the Journal

IJETAA encompasses a broad spectrum of topics, divided into three main categories:

  1. Emerging Technologies:

    • Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
    • Robotics and Autonomous Systems
    • Internet of Things (IoT)
    • Nanotechnology
    • Quantum Computing

  2. Advanced Applications:

    • Healthcare and Biomedical Engineering
    • Smart Cities and Urban Planning
    • Renewable Energy and Sustainability
    • Advanced Manufacturing and Industry 4.0
    • Cybersecurity and Data Privacy
    • Advanced Applications in Education
    • Innovations in Financial Economy

  3. Interdisciplinary Innovations:

    • AI in Healthcare
    • Technology in Education
    • Environmental Technology Solutions
    • Ethical Implications and Societal Impact of Technology

Types of Contributions

IJETAA accepts various types of contributions, including:

  • State-of-the-art Reviews
  • Opinion Pieces on Emerging Trends
  • Case Studies of Technology Application
  • Future Directions and Challenges in Technology and Applications
  • Technical Reports and Short Communications

Peer Review Criteria

  1. Relevance to the Journal's Scope:

    • The manuscript must align with the core areas of focus outlined above.
    • It should contribute significantly to the existing body of knowledge in its respective field.

  2. Originality and Innovation:

    • The work should present novel ideas, methods, or findings.
    • It should not have been published elsewhere or be under consideration for publication in another journal.

    • The plagiarism check result should be less than 30%.

  3. Scientific Rigor and Validity:

    • The research methodology must be sound and well-documented.
    • Data should be accurately analyzed, and conclusions should be logically derived from the data.

  4. Quality of Content:

    • The manuscript should be comprehensive and well-organized, providing a thorough overview of the topic.
    • For review articles, the literature review should be exhaustive and up-to-date.
    • For research articles, the study should be detailed, with clear objectives, methodology, results, and discussion.

  5. Figures and Tables:

    • The inclusion of figures, tables, and other graphical elements is encouraged to enhance the clarity and impact of the manuscript.
    • All graphical elements must be of high quality and appropriately referenced within the text.

  6. Clarity and Style:

    • The manuscript should be clearly written, with a logical flow and coherence.
    • The language should be professional and free of grammatical errors.
    • Authors should adhere to the journal's formatting guidelines.

  7. Ethical Considerations:

    • Authors must ensure that their research complies with ethical standards, including obtaining necessary approvals and consent.
    • Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed.

  8. Length and Format:

    • The manuscript should be between 8-18 pages, including references, figures, and tables.
    • Authors should follow the journal's specific formatting guidelines, including citation style and layout.

Review Process

  1. Initial Screening:

    • The editorial team conducts an initial screening to ensure the manuscript meets the basic criteria of relevance, originality, and formatting.

  2. Assignment to Reviewers:

    • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

  3. Reviewer Feedback:

    • Reviewers provide detailed feedback on the manuscript, including comments on strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement.
    • Reviewers recommend one of the following: acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.

  4. Decision:

    • The editorial team considers the reviewers' recommendations and makes a final decision.
    • Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and are expected to address all feedback in their revisions.

  5. Revisions:

    • Authors must resubmit their revised manuscript within the stipulated time frame.
    • Revised manuscripts may undergo further review to ensure all issues have been adequately addressed.

  6. Final Acceptance:

    • Once the manuscript meets all standards, it is accepted for publication.
    • The final version undergoes copyediting and formatting before being published.