Peer Review

Peer Review Process

International Journal of Information System and Innovation Management (IJISIM) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, transparent, fair, and unbiased Double-Blind Peer Review process. Every manuscript submitted to IJISIM undergoes multiple stages of evaluation to ensure scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's scope in Information Systems, Technology Management, Innovation Management, Digital Transformation, and related interdisciplinary fields.

Neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities throughout the review process, ensuring an objective, independent, and impartial evaluation.

Stage 1. Editorial Office Screening

After submission, every manuscript is first examined by the Editorial Office to ensure that:

  • the manuscript complies with the Author Guidelines;

  • the article fits the journal's Aims and Scope;

  • all required submission files are complete;

  • the manuscript follows the journal template;

  • references are properly formatted;

  • ethical statements are included where applicable;

  • the similarity index is within the acceptable threshold using plagiarism detection software;

  • the manuscript has not been previously published or simultaneously submitted elsewhere.

Manuscripts failing to meet these basic requirements may be returned to the authors for technical revision before entering peer review or may be rejected without external review (desk rejection).

Stage 2. Initial Editorial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Handling Editor evaluates the manuscript based on:

  • originality and novelty;

  • scientific contribution;

  • research significance;

  • methodological appropriateness;

  • theoretical contribution;

  • practical implications;

  • clarity of presentation;

  • relevance to IJISIM.

At this stage, manuscripts that clearly fall outside the journal's scope or fail to meet minimum scientific standards may be rejected.

Stage 3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the editorial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's research area.

IJISIM adopts a Double-Blind Peer Review system, meaning:

  • reviewers do not know the identity of the authors;

  • authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.

Reviewers evaluate each manuscript independently without influence from other reviewers.

Whenever possible, reviewers are selected from institutions different from those of the authors to minimize conflicts of interest and ensure an objective evaluation.

Stage 4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several scientific criteria, including:

  • originality and novelty of the research;

  • significance of the contribution to Information Systems, Technology Management, Innovation Management, Digital Transformation, and related disciplines;

  • relevance to the journal's aims and scope;

  • adequacy and quality of the literature review;

  • clarity of research objectives and research questions;

  • appropriateness of the research methodology;

  • validity and reliability of data collection and analysis;

  • interpretation and discussion of findings;

  • consistency between results and conclusions;

  • managerial, technological, and practical implications;

  • quality of figures, tables, and illustrations;

  • completeness, relevance, and currency of references;

  • writing quality and manuscript organization;

  • compliance with publication ethics.

Reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed, constructive, objective, and evidence-based comments to help authors improve the scientific quality of their manuscripts.

Stage 5. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the Handling Editor and Editor-in-Chief make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without Revision

  • Minor Revision

  • Major Revision

  • Reject and Resubmit as a New Submission

  • Reject

The final publication decision always rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Stage 6. Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests are expected to:

  • revise the manuscript carefully;

  • respond individually to every reviewer comment;

  • submit a detailed Response to Reviewers document;

  • highlight all revisions made in the revised manuscript.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified deadline may result in manuscript withdrawal.

Stage 7. Second Round Review

Major revisions are generally returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

Minor revisions may be evaluated directly by the Handling Editor without additional external review when appropriate.

Additional rounds of revision may be requested until the manuscript fully satisfies the journal's publication standards.

Stage 8. Third Reviewer

IJISIM normally appoints two independent reviewers for each manuscript.

However, a third reviewer may be assigned under circumstances such as:

  • substantially conflicting recommendations between reviewers;

  • significant disagreement regarding scientific quality;

  • requests from the Editor requiring additional expert opinion;

  • interdisciplinary research requiring additional specialized expertise.

The third review assists the Editor in making a balanced, objective, and well-informed editorial decision.

Stage 9. Final Acceptance

After all reviewer comments have been satisfactorily addressed, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision.

Accepted manuscripts proceed through the following production stages:

  • copyediting;

  • English language editing (when necessary);

  • layout editing;

  • proofreading;

  • DOI registration;

  • metadata verification;

  • online publication.

Reviewer Responsibilities

IJISIM reviewers are expected to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, confidentiality, objectivity, and publication ethics.

Reviewers should:

  • review only manuscripts within their area of expertise;

  • maintain strict confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts;

  • declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest immediately;

  • provide objective, unbiased, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations;

  • avoid personal criticism of the authors;

  • support comments with appropriate scientific evidence whenever possible;

  • identify important published work not cited by the authors;

  • report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, image manipulation, citation manipulation, or unethical research practices;

  • complete reviews within the assigned review period.

Reviewers must not:

  • use unpublished information for personal research or commercial purposes;

  • disclose manuscript contents to unauthorized parties;

  • contact authors directly;

  • allow personal beliefs or institutional affiliations to influence their recommendations.

Reviewer Guidelines

Before accepting a review invitation, reviewers should:

  • verify that the manuscript matches their expertise;

  • ensure there are no conflicts of interest;

  • confirm their availability to complete the review within the specified timeframe.

If the manuscript falls outside their expertise or a conflict of interest exists, reviewers should promptly decline the invitation.

Review Submission Procedure

After accepting the review invitation, reviewers should:

  1. Download the manuscript.

  2. Carefully evaluate all sections of the manuscript.

  3. Provide detailed comments using manuscript review tools (e.g., Microsoft Word Track Changes or annotations where applicable).

  4. Complete the IJISIM Reviewer Evaluation Form.

  5. Provide confidential comments for the Editor when necessary.

  6. Provide constructive comments intended for the authors.

  7. Recommend one of the following editorial decisions:

    • Accept

    • Minor Revision

    • Major Revision

    • Reject

  8. Upload:

    • the annotated manuscript (if applicable);

    • the completed reviewer evaluation form;

    • any supplementary review documents.

  9. Submit the review through the Online Journal System (OJS).

Publication Ethics

All reviewers, editors, and authors are expected to comply with the ethical principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Any suspected ethical misconduct—including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, citation manipulation, image manipulation, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other unethical publishing practices—will be investigated in accordance with the Publication Ethics Policy of the International Journal of Information System and Innovation Management (IJISIM) and the COPE Core Practices.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject manuscripts, request corrections, issue expressions of concern, retract published articles, or take other appropriate editorial actions if violations of publication ethics are identified.