Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal covers all aspects of applied engineering, applied Science and information technology, that is:

Engineering:

  • Energy
  • Mechanical Engineering
  • Computing and Artificial Intelligence
  • Applied Biosciences and Bioengineering
  • Environmental and Sustainable Science and Technology
  • Quantum Science and Technology
  • Applied Physics
  • Earth Sciences and Geography
  • Civil Engineering
  • Electrical, Electronics and Communications Engineering
  • Robotics and Automation
  • Marine Engineering
  • Aerospace Science and Engineering
  • Architecture
  • Chemical & Process
  • Structural,
  • Geological & Mining Engineering
  • Industrial
  • Mechanical & Materials

Science:

  • Bioscience & Biotechnology
  • Chemistry
  • Food Technology
  • Applied Biosciences and Bioengineering
  • Environmental
  • Health Science
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics
  • Applied Physics
  • Biology
  • Pharmaceutical Science

Information Technology:

  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Computer Science
  • Computer Network
  • Data Mining
  • Web
  • Language Programming
  • E-Learning & Multimedia
  • Information System
  • Internet & Mobile Computing
  • Database
  • Data Warehouse
  • Big Data
  • Machine Learning
  • Operating System
  • Algorithm
  • Computer Architecture
  • Computer Security
  • Embedded system
  • Coud Computing
  • Internet of Thing
  • Robotics
  • Computer Hardware
  • Information System
  • Geographical Information System
  • Virtual Reality,
  • Augmented Reality
  • Multimedia
  • Computer Vision
  • Computer Graphics
  • Pattern & Speech Recognition
  • Image processing
  • ICT interaction with society,
  • ICT application in social science,
  • ICT as a social research tool, ICT in education

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY) is a double blind and peer reviewed international journal. Every paper submitted to IJESTY for publication is subject to peer review. The peer review in this journal is an evaluation of the submitted paper by two or more individuals of similar competence to the author. It aims to determine the academic paper's suitability for publication. The peer review method is employed to maintain standards of quality and provide credibility of the papers. The peer review at IJESTY proceeds in 9 steps with description as follows.

1. Submission of Paper

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is carried out via an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). But in order to facilitate authors, IJESTY temporarily also accepts paper submissions by email to email ijestyjournal@gmail.com

2. Editorial Office Assessment

The submitted paper is first assessed by the IJESTY editor. The editor checks whether it is suitable with IJESTY’s focus and scope. The paper’s composition and arrangement are evaluated against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. In addition, an assessment of the minimum required quality of the paper for publication begins at this step, including one that assesses whether there is a major methodological flaw. Every submitted paper which pass this step will be checked by Turnitin to identify any plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)

The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) checks if the paper is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant for publication. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further

4. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals who he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers (also known as referees) based on expertise, closeness of research interest, and no  conflict of interest consideration. The peer review process at IJESTY involves a community of experts in a narrowly defined field of biomedical sciences, clinical medicine, community medicine, social medicine, and medical education, who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review.  The impartiality is also maintained by the double blind peer review employed in this journal. That said, the reviewer does not know the author’s identity, conversely the author does not know the reviewer’s identity.  The paper is sent to two reviewers anonymously.

5. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for suggestion of alternative reviewers, when he or she declines to review.

6. Review is Conducted

The reviewer allocates time to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The EIC and handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely between both reviewers, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to obtain an extra opinion before making a decision.

8. The Decision is Communicated

The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Reviewers' comment are sent anonymously to corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.

9. Final Steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back to the author for either major or minor revision, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. The author should make corrections and revise the paper per the reviewers’ comments and instructions.

After revision has been made, the author should resubmit the revised paper to the editor supplemented with a cover page containing a check list that declares points of correction and revision that have been made.

If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive the revised version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.

If the editor is happy with the revised paper, it is considered to be accepted. The accepted papers will be published online and all are freely available as downloadable pdf files.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

This statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher, namely Master Program of Information Technology, Universitas Malikussaleh.

Section A: Publication and authorship 

  1. All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two International Reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
  2. Review processes are blind peer review.
  3. The factors taken into account in the review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 
  4. Authors must participate in the peer review process. 
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. 

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

 

Plagiarism Check

Every manuscript submitted to International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY), the initial stages of the manuscript will check the plagiarism screening using Turnitin software by an editor. The level of tolerance of similarity should be below 20 percent. If more than 20 percent of the level of similarity, then the editor will reject submitted articles.

 

 

Copy Editing and Proofreading

Every manuscript accepted by International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY) to be an object to Grammerly writing-enhancement program conducted by Editorial Board.

 

References Management

Every manuscript submitted to International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY) the author should use references management software. e.g Mendeley or Zotero, etc to make it easier to set the library format requested by IJESTY. The library format (citation format) for IJESTY is IEEE style.

Submitted manuscript that do not use the IEEE style will be rejected in the initial selection process. So before submitting, please make sure that author to use the IEEE citation style.

 

Publication Frequency

International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY) publishes the latest research results in the fields of Engineering, Science and Information Technology. First published in 2020. Published with a frequency of 3 times a year, March, July, and November.

 

Publication Fees

IJESTY does not require publication fees from authors, for all countries are free of publication fees, please submit your manuscript to this journal.

 

Correction and Retraction Policies

The papers published in the International Journal of Engineering, Science and Information Technology (IJESTY) will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.