PeerReviewProcess

Peer Review Process

Journal of Informatics (JOOFIN) — AISU Publisher

Double-Blind
Review Model
Min. 2 Reviewers
Per Manuscript
4–8 Weeks
First Decision Time
Scopus Aligned
Quality Standards

1. Peer Review Policy Overview

Journal of Informatics (JOOFIN) enforces a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review policy to guarantee unbiased, objective, and high-quality scientific evaluations. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities throughout the review lifecycle.

All submitted manuscripts undergo comprehensive peer evaluation by independent domain experts specializing in computer science, software engineering, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and data science.

2. Step-by-Step Editorial & Review Workflow

To maintain high publishing standards, every submission passes through five structured editorial phases:

1
Initial Desk Assessment & Scope Verification
The Managing Editor checks the manuscript for scope alignment, formatting compliance, language quality, and originality. Submissions are screened using Turnitin / iThenticate (maximum similarity threshold: 15%). Manuscripts failing initial checks are desk-rejected within 3–5 days.
2
Double-Blind Peer Review Assignment
An Associate Editor assigns at least two independent reviewers with established research records in the specific subfield of informatics. Authors must ensure all author details are removed from the main manuscript file to preserve anonymity.
3
Technical & Methodological Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate novelty, algorithmic correctness, theoretical soundness, experimental validation, reproducibility, and source code/dataset transparency. Review reports are submitted via the OJS 4.5 editorial interface.
4
Editorial Decision & Author Revision
Based on reviewer recommendations, the Section Editor renders one of the following decisions:
  • Accept Submission: Accepted without further modifications.
  • Revisions Required: Minor technical or textual revisions needed.
  • Resubmit for Review: Major structural, algorithmic, or experimental revisions required; re-evaluation needed.
  • Decline Submission: Rejected due to fundamental flaws, lack of novelty, or out-of-scope content.
5
Final Acceptance & Production
Once all reviewer comments are satisfactorily addressed and verified by the editor, a formal Letter of Acceptance (LoA) is issued. The paper proceeds to copyediting, layout conversion, DOI registration (Crossref), and final publication.

3. Specific Evaluation Criteria for Informatics Studies

Reviewers assess submissions against Scopus-aligned standards tailored to computing and informatics research:

Originality & Novelty

Proposes innovative algorithms, architectures, models, or new applications of existing methodologies.

Technical Rigor & Code Integrity

Correct formulation of algorithms, pseudo-code clarity, mathematical proofs, and data structure efficiency.

 

Experimental Reproducibility

Clear baseline comparisons, dataset details, hardware/software setup, and benchmark evaluation metrics.

Citation Quality

Appropriate contextual grounding with recent high-impact literature (Scopus/Web of Science core publications).

Ethical Compliance & Conflict of Interest

JOOFIN strictly follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Editors and reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, or collaborative) prior to accepting a submission. Unethical behavior or breach of confidentiality will result in immediate removal from the editorial board/reviewer registry.