Peer Review Process

The International Science Journal of Engineering & Agriculture maintains certain requirements for the selection and acceptance of articles submitted for publication. The editors of the journal call for adherence to the principles of the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications developed by the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications (COPE).

Obligations of authors

Authors must ensure that they have written completely original articles, and if authors have used the work or words of other scholars, this should be properly documented as references or quotations in quotation marks. Submitting an identical article to more than one journal is considered unethical behavior.

The article should be structured, formatted according to the requirements and should contain enough references. Bad faith or knowingly inaccurate statements in the article are unacceptable. Corresponding author ensures that all contributors have read and approved the final version of the article to be published.

The authors of the articles are responsible for the content of the articles. The editors have the right to withdraw the article if it turns out that someone's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics were violated during the publication of the article. The editors inform the author about the removal of the article.

Ethical obligations of reviewers

To ensure the evaluation of manuscripts, the editors follow a "blind" review. As manuscript review is one step in the publication process, each reviewer is required to perform a certain amount of review work. If a reviewer is not sure that their qualifications match the research topic presented in the manuscript, they should return the manuscript immediately.

The reviewer must objectively assess the quality of the manuscript, the presented experimental and theoretical work, and also take into account the extent to which the work meets high scientific and literary standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

Reviewers must adequately explain and justify their judgments so that editors and authors can understand the basis of their comments. The reviewer should bring to the editor's attention any similarities between the manuscript and any published article.

Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information and arguments contained in this manuscript. All articles submitted to the editorial board go through the review process. The type of review is blind (the reviewer does not know the authors, the authors do not know the reviewer).

The task of peer review is to facilitate the selection of manuscripts for publication and to make recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, determining its compliance with the journal's requirements.

Average time for reviewing manuscripts: 25 days-45 days.

Review procedure

  1. All submitted articles are registered at the time of submission of the manuscript to the editorial office.
  2. The editors of the journal decide on the selection of a reviewer for a given manuscript according to its subject, or the manuscript is rejected as not corresponding to the subject matter of the collection.
  3. Manuscript materials are submitted for review to designated reviewers. The result of the review is the reviewer's recommendation.
  • In the case of a positive review, the manuscript is sent to the editors for preparation for publication.
  • If it is necessary to revise the manuscript, a review is sent to the author along with all the comments and wishes of the reviewer.
  • In the case of a negative review of the manuscript - the author is sent a review with a refusal.
  1. After receiving the review results, the author prepares the necessary materials. If it is necessary to revise the manuscript, he prepares a revised version of the manuscript. The revised version of the manuscript is sent for re-review.
  2. A manuscript that has received a positive review is approved for publication by the editor and sent to the editorial office for further preparation for publication.

The editors use Google Forms, a survey administration/review/response software that is part of the Google Docs Editors web package offered by Google. Reviewers are provided with a specific link where they can view the manuscript and provide a review.

The reviewers evaluate: the title of the article; objects, methods and results of research; review of the literature and the meaning of the article; conclusions of the article; the structure of the article is compact, consistent and logical. They can provide comments and suggestions to authors.

The editors use eTXT Antiplagiarism.