Review Process Policy

Intechno Journal: Information Technology Journal is committed to ensuring that all manuscripts are evaluated through a fair, rigorous, transparent, and timely peer-review process. The journal applies a double-blind peer-review system to maintain the quality, originality, relevance, and scientific integrity of published research.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening, followed by peer review for manuscripts considered suitable for the journal's scope and publication standards.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is examined by the editorial team to assess its suitability for further consideration. The initial screening includes:

  • Scope and Relevance: Whether the manuscript aligns with the journal's focus on intelligent computing and applied information technologies.

  • Originality and Contribution: Whether the manuscript presents an original contribution to the field.

  • Compliance with Author Guidelines: Whether the manuscript follows the journal's formatting, structure, language, and submission requirements.

  • Publication Ethics: Whether the submission complies with the journal's policies on plagiarism, authorship, research ethics, and conflicts of interest.

  • Completeness: Whether all required manuscript components and author metadata have been provided.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected at this stage without external peer review. Authors may be asked to revise or complete their submissions before further consideration.

2. Assignment of Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area of the submission.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, publication record, and ability to provide an objective assessment. The editorial team seeks to avoid conflicts of interest when selecting reviewers.

Reviewers should not have relationships or interests that could compromise their impartiality in evaluating the manuscript.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Intechno Journal uses a double-blind peer-review process in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

Authors should ensure that their manuscripts do not contain identifying information that could unnecessarily reveal their identities to reviewers. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts and must not disclose or use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

The double-blind process is intended to support impartial evaluation based on the scientific quality and contribution of the submitted work.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts critically and constructively based on the following criteria:

  1. Relevance: The manuscript's alignment with the journal's scope and focus.

  2. Originality and Novelty: The degree to which the study contributes new knowledge, methods, findings, or applications.

  3. Scientific Quality: The soundness of the research design, theoretical foundation, and methodological approach.

  4. Methodological Rigor: The appropriateness of the methods, datasets, experimental procedures, statistical analyses, and evaluation techniques.

  5. Results and Discussion: The clarity of the results, the quality of interpretation, and the extent to which the discussion is supported by evidence.

  6. Contribution and Significance: The value of the findings for information technology research, development, or practical applications.

  7. References and Related Work: The adequacy, relevance, and accuracy of citations and the discussion of previous research.

  8. Presentation and Clarity: The organization, readability, language quality, and compliance with the journal's manuscript guidelines.

  9. Research Ethics: Compliance with applicable ethical standards, including appropriate data handling, attribution, disclosures, and research approvals where required.

Reviewers should provide clear, evidence-based comments to help the authors improve their manuscripts and assist editors in making informed decisions.

5. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers' reports and the editor's independent assessment, the journal may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without further substantive revisions, subject to final editorial checks.

  • Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited changes to improve clarity, completeness, presentation, or other aspects that do not require substantial redevelopment of the study.

  • Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions to address significant concerns related to methodology, analysis, interpretation, scientific contribution, or presentation.

  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's requirements for publication, has fundamental scientific or ethical problems, or falls outside the journal's scope.

The editorial decision is made by the responsible editor based on the overall quality of the manuscript, the reviewers' recommendations, and the journal's editorial standards. Reviewer recommendations are important but are not automatically binding on the editor.

6. Revision and Resubmission

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript within the deadline specified by the editorial team. Authors should provide a point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.

If a suggestion is not adopted, authors should provide a clear and scientifically justified explanation. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified period, without an approved extension, may result in the manuscript being treated as withdrawn or requiring a new submission, at the editor's discretion.

7. Review Timeline

The journal aims to process manuscripts efficiently while maintaining the quality and rigor of peer review. The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the number of revision rounds, and the time taken by authors to respond to editorial decisions.

Submission does not guarantee acceptance or publication within a particular issue. Authors are encouraged to respond promptly to editorial requests to help facilitate the review process.

8. Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities

Editors and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Manuscripts must not be shared with unauthorized individuals or used for purposes unrelated to the review process.

Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest, provide objective and respectful feedback, and avoid personal criticism of the authors. Editors are responsible for managing the review process impartially and ensuring that publication decisions are based on scholarly merit rather than personal, institutional, or commercial considerations.

Any suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate submission, or other research misconduct identified during peer review will be handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant factual error, procedural irregularity, or demonstrable misunderstanding of the manuscript may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office at intechno@amikom.ac.id.

Appeals must clearly state the grounds for reconsideration and provide relevant supporting evidence. Disagreement with a decision alone, without substantive justification, may not be sufficient grounds for an appeal.

The editorial team will assess appeals objectively and may seek an independent opinion where appropriate. The journal's decision following the appeal will be communicated to the corresponding author.

10. Final Editorial Assessment and Publication

Manuscripts that receive an acceptance decision undergo final editorial checks to ensure that revisions have been completed, the manuscript meets the journal's formatting requirements, and all necessary publication information is available.

Acceptance does not exempt a manuscript from final verification of references, author information, declarations, figures, tables, and other publication requirements. The editorial team reserves the right to request additional corrections before publication.

Accepted articles are published as open-access content under the journal's applicable licensing policy.

11. Contact Information

For questions regarding the peer-review process, editorial decisions, or manuscript status, authors may contact:

Editorial Office
Intechno Journal: Information Technology Journal
Universitas Amikom Yogyakarta
Email: intechno@amikom.ac.id
Online Submission: https://ungu.in/intechno

Intechno Journal is committed to maintaining a rigorous, ethical, and impartial peer-review process that supports the dissemination of high-quality research in information technology.