Peer Review Process

The Journal of the Ethiopian Society of Chemical Engineering (JESChE) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, transparent, and timely peer-review process. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific quality, originality, significance, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

1. Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Associate Editor. During this stage, the editorial office evaluates:

  • Whether the manuscript falls within the journal's scope.
  • Compliance with the journal's submission guidelines.
  • Originality and scientific contribution.
  • Language quality and overall presentation.
  • Compliance with publication ethics.
  • Potential plagiarism using similarity detection software.

Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected without external peer review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

JESChE employs a double-blind peer-review system in which:

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

This process promotes fairness, impartiality, and objective evaluation while minimizing potential conflicts of interest and bias.

3. Reviewer Selection

Editors select independent reviewers based on their expertise, research experience, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest. Normally, each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers.

Additional reviewers may be invited whenever the editorial office considers further expert evaluation necessary.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Originality and novelty.
  • Scientific significance.
  • Technical quality and methodological rigor.
  • Appropriate experimental design or theoretical framework.
  • Validity of results and conclusions.
  • Adequacy of references.
  • Clarity of presentation.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Overall contribution to chemical engineering and related disciplines.

5. Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the handling editor may make one of the following decisions:

Decision Description
Accept The manuscript is accepted without further revisions.
Minor Revision Authors are requested to make small revisions before acceptance.
Major Revision Substantial revisions are required and the revised manuscript may undergo further review.
Reject The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.

6. Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests should submit:

  • A revised manuscript.
  • A detailed response letter addressing every reviewer comment.
  • Clear indication of all revisions made.

Failure to adequately address reviewer comments may result in rejection.

7. Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers shall treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information obtained during peer review must not be disclosed, shared, or used for personal advantage.

8. Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest. Individuals with conflicts shall decline review assignments or editorial responsibility for the affected manuscript.

9. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and professional comments.
  • Evaluate manuscripts solely on scientific merit.
  • Identify relevant published work not cited by the authors.
  • Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or research misconduct.
  • Complete reviews within the requested timeframe.

10. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding or procedural error may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals will be considered carefully and may involve additional editorial assessment or independent review. The Editor-in-Chief's decision after appeal shall be final.

11. Peer Review Timeline

Editorial Stage Estimated Time
Initial Editorial Screening 1–2 weeks
Reviewer Assignment 1 week
Peer Review 3–6 weeks
Author Revision 2–4 weeks
Final Editorial Decision 1 week
Production and Publication 2–4 weeks

Actual review times may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the extent of revisions required.

12. Commitment to Quality

The Journal of the Ethiopian Society of Chemical Engineering is committed to maintaining an efficient, ethical, transparent, and high-quality peer-review process that supports the dissemination of reliable scientific knowledge and advances research in chemical engineering and related disciplines.