Peer Review Process

The Computer Engineering and Applications (JCEA) journal safeguards the quality, reliability, and accuracy of its published research through a rigorous double-blind peer review procedure. Veredas upholds the highest standards of academic rigor and integrity. This document outlines the principles, objectives, procedures, and roles central to the JCEA peer review process.

Objectives

• Enhance research quality by accepting only well-executed, scientifically sound studies.
• Provide constructive feedback so authors can refine their manuscripts for clarity and completeness.
• Maintain integrity and credibility by upholding high academic and ethical standards.
• Ensure impartiality by eliminating biases related to authors’ identities, affiliations, or geography.
• Encourage scholarly discourse with objective and balanced reviewer evaluations.
• Promote transparency while protecting anonymity and confidentiality in the review process.
• Support the academic community through a rigorous evaluation that benefits authors, reviewers, and readers.
• Facilitate impactful research dissemination by selecting studies that add significant knowledge.
• Identify and address ethical concerns, ensuring compliance with research and publication standards.
• Foster trust with a fair, transparent, and reliable system for evaluating submissions.

Double-Blind Peer Review Workflow

1. Manuscript Submission
   Authors submit manuscripts through the JCEA online system, including all required files, figures, and supplementary materials.
2. Initial Screening
   The editorial office reviews submissions for compliance with guidelines, appropriate formatting, and journal scope. Plagiarism checks and desk rejections are conducted at this stage.
3. Reviewer Selection
   Editors assign at least two qualified reviewers based on subject expertise and reviewer record. Reviewers receive anonymized manuscripts to ensure an unbiased evaluation.
4. Review Process
   Reviewers assess originality, significance, methodology, relevance, presentation, and clarity. Detailed feedback is provided along with a recommendation: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject.
5. Editorial Decision
   The editor compiles reviewer feedback and makes an initial decision. If revision is required, anonymized reviewer comments and revision deadlines are communicated to the authors.
6. Final Decision
   Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review. The final decision is made based on reviewer input and the resolution of all concerns.
7. Publication
   Accepted manuscripts are copyedited, formatted, and proofread. Authors review final proofs prior to publication. The finished article is published online and added to the Veredas Journal archive.