Professor of School of Engineering, Design and Built Environment, Western Sydney University, Australia. His research interests cover Industry 4.0, Additive Manufacturing, Advanced Engineering Materials and Structures (Metals and Composites), Multi-scale Modelling of Materials and Structures, Metal Forming and Metal Surface Treatment.
IJMERR operates a rigorous double-blind peer-review process. This is a assessment with at least two independent reviewers, followed by a final acceptance/rejection decision by the Action Editor. The following provides notes on each step.
Immediately after submission, this check is initially carried out by the executive editor to assess:
• Suitability of the manuscript to the journal/special issue;
• Qualification and background of authors;
• Ithenticate plagiarism check: We will generate a report showing text duplication and potential plagiarism, along with advice on where to modify text and add further citations.
Once this is done, the manuscript is sent to an action Editor based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. All manuscripts shall be handled by an action Editor who does not have any potential conflict of interest with any of the manuscript’s authors.
If the action editor finds that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to go through the normal peer review process, or that the subject of the manuscript is not within the journal’s scope, the manuscript shall be rejected with no further processing.
At least two review reports are collected for each submitted article. Suggestions of reviewers can be made by action editor during pre-check.
The following checks are applied to all reviewers:
• That they hold no conflicts of interest with the authors;
• That they hold a PhD;
• They must have recent publications in the field of the submitted paper;
The reviewers will submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to Action Editor:
• Accept without revision
• Consider after minor revision
• Consider after major revision
• Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel
When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Action Editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations:
• Ask author for revision
Reviewers make recommendations, and the Action Editor are free to disagree with their views. If they do so, they should justify their decision, for the benefit of the authors.
If the Action Editor recommends “Accept without revision”, the manuscript will be double-checked by editorial office. Once this is done, the authors will be notified of the manuscript’s acceptance.
If the Action Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate.
If the Action Editor recommends “ask author for revision, it will enter into “Revision” process.
In cases revisions are recommended, the authors are notified to prepare and submit a revised version of their manuscript with the required changes suggested by the reviewers. The former reviewers will review the revised manuscript and provide suggestion as to whether the authors had addressed all their concerns. The Action Editor will check the revised version, author response, and second round comments, and then make final decision. Once the Action Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.
Once a paper is accepted for publication, it will be sent to authors for final proofreading, and then be arranged for publication.
Copyright © 2015-2023 International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics Research, All Rights Reserved