Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers play an important role in maintaining the academic quality and integrity of the Journal of Intelligent Computing and Connected Systems (JICCS). Reviewers are expected to provide independent, constructive, fair, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.

1. Evaluate the Manuscript Objectively

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on their:

  • Originality and contribution
  • Scientific and technical quality
  • Methodology
  • Validity of results
  • Clarity and organization
  • Relevance to the scope of JICCS
  • Quality of discussion and conclusions

Personal opinions about the authors should not influence the review.

2. Maintain Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts received for review as confidential.

Reviewers should not:

  • Share the manuscript with unauthorized individuals.
  • Discuss the manuscript with others outside the review process.
  • Copy or distribute unpublished material.
  • Use information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

3. Provide Constructive Feedback

Reviewer comments should help authors improve their manuscript.

Reviews should:

  • Clearly identify major concerns.
  • Explain technical or methodological problems.
  • Point out unclear sections.
  • Suggest improvements where appropriate.
  • Distinguish major issues from minor corrections.
  • Maintain a professional and respectful tone.

Personal, offensive, or inappropriate comments should be avoided.

4. Identify Potential Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should disclose any situation that could affect their impartiality.

Potential conflicts may include:

  • Close professional relationships with the authors.
  • Recent collaboration with an author.
  • Personal relationships.
  • Financial interests.
  • Direct competition related to the research.
  • Any other relationship that could influence the review.

If a significant conflict exists, reviewers should inform the editorial team and decline the assignment when appropriate.

5. Assess Research Quality

Reviewers should carefully assess the scientific and technical aspects of the manuscript.

Depending on the type of submission, reviewers may evaluate:

  • Research objectives.
  • Literature review.
  • Methodology.
  • Experimental design.
  • Algorithms or models.
  • Data and datasets.
  • Results and analysis.
  • Statistical methods.
  • Figures and tables.
  • Conclusions.
  • References.

6. Check for Ethical Concerns

Reviewers should alert the editorial team if they identify possible concerns involving:

  • Plagiarism.
  • Duplicate publication.
  • Fabrication or manipulation of data.
  • Inappropriate image manipulation.
  • Unethical research practices.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  • Other significant publication-ethics concerns.

Reviewers should communicate such concerns to the editor rather than contacting the authors directly about suspected misconduct.

7. Check References and Previous Work

Reviewers should assess whether:

  • Important relevant literature has been considered.
  • References appropriately support the claims made.
  • Citations are relevant and accurate.
  • Previous research has been appropriately acknowledged.

Reviewers should not request unnecessary citations solely to increase their own citation count or that of a particular publication.

8. Provide a Clear Recommendation

After completing the evaluation, reviewers should provide a recommendation through the journal's review system.

Possible recommendations may include:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

The recommendation should be consistent with the comments provided in the review.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team.

9. Complete Reviews on Time

Reviewers should make reasonable efforts to complete reviews within the timeframe provided by the journal.

If a reviewer requires additional time, they should contact the editorial team as soon as possible.

If they are unable to complete the review, they should decline the assignment promptly.

10. Do Not Use Unpublished Information

Reviewers must not use unpublished ideas, methods, results, or other information obtained from a manuscript for their own research or professional activities.

The intellectual content of an unpublished manuscript must be respected throughout the review process.

11. Use of AI-Assisted Tools

Reviewers should exercise caution when using artificial intelligence or other automated tools during peer review.

Confidential manuscript content should not be uploaded to external AI systems unless such use is explicitly permitted by the journal and appropriate confidentiality safeguards are in place.

Reviewers remain responsible for the confidentiality, accuracy, and quality of their evaluation.

12. After Submitting the Review

After completing a review, reviewers should continue to maintain confidentiality regarding:

  • The manuscript.
  • The identity of authors and reviewers where applicable.
  • Reviewer comments.
  • Editorial discussions.
  • The final editorial decision.

Reviewer Responsibility Checklist

Before submitting a review, reviewers should confirm:

☐ I have evaluated the manuscript objectively.
☐ I have maintained manuscript confidentiality.
☐ I have disclosed any potential conflict of interest.
☐ My comments are constructive and professional.
☐ I have identified significant methodological or technical concerns.
☐ I have considered relevant ethical issues.
☐ I have not used unpublished information from the manuscript.
☐ My recommendation is consistent with my review comments.
☐ I have completed the review within the requested timeframe.

Commitment to Quality

JICCS appreciates the time and expertise contributed by reviewers. Their careful and responsible evaluation supports the quality, integrity, and continuous improvement of scholarly publishing.