Peer review policy

Algerian Journal of Engineering and Technology operates a high-quality, short-track, double-blind peer review process in which the reviewer's name is withheld from the author and the author's name from the reviewer. All submissions to Algerian Journal of Engineering and Technology are double-blind peer reviewed. paper submitted by Associate Editors are submitted to double-blind peer review.

Each paper is sent out to at least two external reviewers but the evaluative process is more heavily concentrated in the hands of the editorial team. The peer review process is as follows:

• Vetting by the Editorial Office to ensure that the article conforms to the Algerian Journal of Engineering and Technology guidelines on length and style. This vetting process includes processing of papers using plagiarism software.
• Review by the editor-in-chief who will take a decision on whether to send it out for eternal review. if an article is deemed of insufficient quality or novelty it can be rejected by the editor-in-chief in conjunction with an Associate Editor at this stage. the author will be informed of this decision with a brief note spelling out the reason for rejection. If the manuscript passes this stage it will be reviewed.
• The editor-in-chief delegates the decision-making authority to an Associate Editor. Two external reviewers will be selected by the Associate Editor and the editor-in-chief will make the final decision.
• Reviewers are expected to respond in 21 days. If the reviewer is unable to complete a review, a new reviewer will be selected.
• A manuscript may be rejected on the basis of one negative review, especially if this review comes from one of the Associate Editors.
• Typically, a revised manuscript will only be reviewed by the Associate Editor or one of the referees.

 

The editors will also continually assess the quality levels of the refereeing procedure and annually review the Associate Editors team to ensure that its range of expertise is aligned with submission and research trends.

Recommended Reviewers

As part of the submission process you will be asked to provide the names of X peers who could be called upon to review your manuscript. Recommended reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Please be aware of any conflicts of interest when recommending reviewers. Examples of conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to) the below:

• The reviewer should have no prior knowledge of your submission
• The reviewer should not have recently collaborated with any of the authors

Please note that the Editors are not obliged to invite any recommended/opposed reviewers to assess your manuscript.