Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The Proceeding of iSAMN employs a rigorous and thorough single-blind peer review process, ensuring that each submission undergoes critical evaluation by qualified experts. This process upholds the scientific merit, originality, and clarity of all accepted papers. All submissions and reviews will be conducted exclusively through the EDAS Conference and Journal Management System. No other means of submitting reviews are allowed. All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Any use of privileged information obtained during peer review for personal gain is strictly prohibited. Reviewers and editors are expected to maintain the highest standards of confidentiality and ethical conduct.

Acceptance of a manuscript is not guaranteed, and all submissions are subject to a rigorous review process. The duration of peer review may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the paper, and required revisions. The editorial team is committed to ensuring a fair and thorough review without compromising quality.

Conflict of Interest (COI)

All individuals involved in the review process must disclose any potential conflicts of interest (COIs). This includes personal, professional, or institutional relationships that may bias their judgment.

Although EDAS uses automated checks to detect conflicts, they may not be exhaustive. Reviewers must proactively inform the Editor-in-Chief if a potential COI is identified.

Reviewers with conflicts of interest should withdraw from the review of the affected manuscript.

 

Reviewer Responsibilities

Each reviewer is responsible for providing:

• A constructive, unbiased, and detailed evaluation
  
  
• Comments that guide the authors in revising their work
  
  
• A recommendation on whether the paper should be accepted, revised, or rejected
  
  

All feedback must be submitted through EDAS, within the assigned review period.

 

Evaluation Criteria

 

     Technical Criteria

• Scientific merit: Rigor, accuracy, and correctness of methodology and data interpretation
  
  
• Clarity of expression: Coherence, readability, and logical flow of ideas
  
  
• Context and references: Adequate background, literature review, and appropriate citations
  
  

     Quality Criteria

• Originality: Novelty and relevance of the research
  
  
• Motivation: Justification of the research problem and significance of the findings
  
  
• Redundancy: Degree of overlap with previously published work
  
  
• Length: Whether the content justifies the manuscript’s length
  
  

     Presentation Criteria

• Title: Accuracy and relevance to the article content
  
  
• Abstract: Completeness and clarity as a stand-alone summary
  
  
• Figures and tables: Necessity, clarity, and quality of illustrations and captions. Avoid presenting the same data in both a figure and a table; each should provide unique value to the manuscript.
  
  
• Text and formulas: Precision, clarity, and conciseness
  
  

     Conclusion: Clear summary of key findings and their significance to the field

 

 

Updated:: 07/07/2025 [roslina_ar]