Editors Guidelines

Editor Guidelines

Academic Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (AJECE)

Editors are responsible for safeguarding the quality, integrity, and reputation of the Academic Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (AJECE). They oversee the peer-review process, ensure adherence to ethical publishing standards, and make fair, objective, and timely decisions regarding manuscript publication. The following guidelines outline the principal duties and responsibilities of editors.

  1. Preliminary Manuscript Evaluation

Scope and Relevance

  • Assess whether the submitted manuscript falls within the aims and scope of AJECE.
  • Determine the manuscript’s relevance to the fields of electrical engineering, computer engineering, information technology, artificial intelligence, embedded systems, communications, power systems, electronics, and related disciplines.

Quality and Compliance Check

  • Conduct an initial evaluation of the manuscript’s scientific quality, originality, and potential contribution to the field.
  • Verify compliance with the journal’s submission requirements, including formatting, structure, language quality, and completeness of required documents.
  • Screen the manuscript for plagiarism, duplicate publication, and other forms of academic misconduct using appropriate similarity-detection tools.

Editorial Screening Decision

  • If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or falls outside its scope, issue a desk rejection with a clear and professional explanation.
  • If the manuscript satisfies the initial requirements, proceed with the peer-review process by assigning suitable reviewers.
  1. Reviewer Selection and Assignment

Reviewer Expertise

  • Select reviewers with appropriate expertise and research experience relevant to the manuscript’s subject area.
  • Consider reviewers’ publication records, technical knowledge, and previous review performance.

Conflict of Interest

  • Ensure that selected reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the authors, institutions, funding agencies, or the submitted work.
  • Replace reviewers when potential bias or conflicts are identified.

Number of Reviewers

  • Assign at least two independent reviewers to each manuscript.
  • Where necessary, appoint additional reviewers to obtain balanced and comprehensive evaluations.
  1. Management of the Peer-Review Process

Monitoring Review Progress

  • Track reviewer responses and ensure reviews are completed within the designated timeframe.
  • Send reminders when necessary to maintain an efficient review process.

Quality Control of Reviews

  • Assess the quality, objectivity, and constructiveness of reviewer reports.
  • Ensure that reviewer comments are professional, respectful, and focused on the scientific content.

Resolving Reviewer Disagreements

  • Evaluate conflicting reviewer recommendations objectively.
  • Seek additional expert opinions when reviews provide substantially divergent conclusions.
  1. Editorial Decision-Making

Assessment Criteria

Editors should base their decisions on:

  • Scientific originality and innovation.
  • Technical accuracy and methodological rigor.
  • Significance and contribution to the field.
  • Clarity of presentation and organization.
  • Compliance with ethical and publication standards.

Editorial Decisions

Accept

The manuscript satisfies all scientific and editorial requirements and is suitable for publication without further revisions.

Minor Revisions

The manuscript requires limited modifications that can be addressed without substantial additional review.

Major Revisions

Significant improvements are necessary before the manuscript can be reconsidered for publication. Revised submissions may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

Reject

The manuscript does not meet the scientific, technical, ethical, or editorial standards of AJECE, or is outside the journal’s scope.

Decision Transparency

  • Clearly justify editorial decisions using reviewer comments and independent editorial assessment.
  • Ensure that all decisions are fair, unbiased, and evidence-based.
  1. Communication with Authors

Constructive Feedback

  • Provide authors with clear, concise, and actionable feedback.
  • Summarize the key issues identified by reviewers and editors.

Revision Guidance

  • Encourage authors to respond comprehensively to all reviewer comments.
  • Ensure that revision requests are specific and facilitate improvement of the manuscript.

Professional Conduct

  • Maintain respectful and professional communication throughout the editorial process.
  • Treat all authors fairly regardless of nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, or academic status.
  1. Ethical Responsibilities

Publication Ethics

  • Uphold the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity.
  • Ensure compliance with international ethical guidelines and best publishing practices.

Handling Misconduct

Investigate and address allegations of:

  • Plagiarism.
  • Duplicate or redundant publication.
  • Data fabrication or falsification.
  • Improper authorship practices.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Confidentiality

  • Maintain confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and reviewer identities in accordance with the journal’s peer-review policy.
  • Ensure that unpublished information is not used for personal or professional benefit.
  1. Post-Acceptance Responsibilities

Production Preparation

Following acceptance, editors should:

  • Verify consistency with journal formatting and style requirements.
  • Confirm that all revisions have been satisfactorily completed.
  • Ensure that figures, tables, references, and supplementary materials meet publication standards.

Proofreading and Final Approval

  • Coordinate with the production team during copyediting and typesetting.
  • Review final proofs to ensure accuracy and quality before publication.
  • Approve the final version for release.
  1. Editorial Development and Journal Growth

Continuous Improvement

  • Collaborate with the Editorial Board to improve editorial policies, procedures, and workflow efficiency.
  • Monitor publication performance and identify opportunities for process enhancement.

Strategic Development

  • Stay informed about emerging trends and advances in electrical and computer engineering research.
  • Encourage submissions in innovative and rapidly developing research areas.
  • Support the development of special issues, thematic collections, and collaborations that enhance the journal’s visibility and impact.
  1. Commitment to Editorial Excellence

Editors of AJECE are expected to uphold the principles of fairness, transparency, integrity, confidentiality, and academic excellence. Through rigorous editorial oversight and ethical decision-making, editors contribute to maintaining the quality, credibility, and international reputation of the Academic Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (AJECE).