Peer Review Process

The TIERS Information Technology Journal adheres to a strict double-blind peer review process to ensure the scientific quality and integrity of all published articles. Each submission is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers (both internal and external), who are experts in the relevant field. This process aims to provide constructive feedback to authors while maintaining high levels of objectivity and professionalism.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

1. Initial Evaluation by the Editorial Board: Upon submission, the article undergoes an initial evaluation by the Editorial Board to ensure it meets the Author Guidelines and Journal Template requirements. The Editorial Board checks the formatting and structure. If the submission does not adhere to the guidelines, it will be returned to the author for revision before proceeding.
2. Plagiarism Check: During the initial evaluation, the editorial team conducts a similarity check using Turnitin to ensure the originality of the manuscript. Articles with high similarity scores will be returned to the authors for revision before continuing to the peer review stage.
3. Peer Review by Two Independent Reviewers: Articles that pass the initial evaluation are submitted for review by two independent reviewers following the double-blind review system. Both the authors' and reviewers' identities remain anonymous. Reviewers assess the quality, relevance, and scientific merit of the content, providing constructive feedback. (This process typically takes about 3-4 weeks).
4. Final Decision by the Editorial Board: After receiving the reviewers’ evaluations, the Editorial Board reviews their feedback and makes the final decision on whether the article should be accepted, revised, or rejected based on scientific validity and contribution to the field.

Ethical Standards & Publication Decision

The peer review process at TIERS Information Technology Journal is conducted according to the highest ethical standards. Reviewers are required to focus their feedback on the academic quality and content of the manuscript, avoiding any personal criticism of the author. We are committed to maintaining a fair, objective, and constructive review process, free from bias or unethical practices.

Following the peer review process, the Journal Editor makes the final decision on the publication of the article. The decision is based on the feedback from the two independent reviewers, the initial assessment by the Editorial Board, and the overall relevance of the article to the field.