Kirkuk Journal of Engineering Science (KJES) follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure that all published research meets high standards of scientific quality, originality, and relevance. The stages of review are outlined below.
Upon submission, manuscripts are first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Handling Editor to confirm they fall within the scope of KJES and meet basic formatting and completeness requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the author or rejected without external review.
Manuscripts that pass initial screening are checked for originality using plagiarism-detection software. Submissions exceeding the journal's acceptable similarity threshold are returned to the author or rejected.
The Handling Editor assigns the manuscript to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise. Author and reviewer identities are kept confidential from one another throughout the process.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for originality, technical soundness, clarity, and relevance, and submit a recommendation of Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject, along with detailed comments for the author.
Based on reviewer recommendations, the Handling Editor makes a decision and communicates it to the corresponding author. In cases of conflicting reviewer recommendations, the Editor may consult an additional reviewer or make the final determination.
Authors asked to revise their manuscript must submit a revised version along with a point-by-point response to reviewer comments within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.
Once a manuscript is accepted, it proceeds to copyediting, typesetting, and proofing before being scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue.
The typical time from submission to first editorial decision is approximately [X] weeks, though this may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.