verifiedOpen Access Peer-Reviewed Scientific Journal (CC BY 4.0)
Submit Manuscript|OJS Login|Register
Peer-Reviewed Academic JournalInternational Journal of Applied Methods in Electronics and Computers
ISSN: 3023-4409DOI Prefix: 10.58190/ijamec
search
person
verifiedJournal Policy & Directives

Reviewer Guidelines & Evaluation Criteria

We follow the double blind peer review policy and reviewer should follow the below given guidelines:

The Responsibility of the Peer Reviewer
The peer reviewer is responsible for critically reading and evaluating a manuscript in their specialty field, and then providing respectful, constructive, and honest feedback to authors about their submission. It is appropriate for the Peer Reviewer to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, ways to improve the strength and quality of the work, and evaluate the relevance and originality of the manuscript.

Scope of the Journal

The International Journal of Applied Methods in Electronics and Computers (IJAMEC) is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing original and high-quality research in applied electronics, computer science, and computational methods. For more information, please refer to the journal’s aims and scope:

https://ijamec.org/index.php/ijamec/focus

Review Criteria

Please assess the manuscript according to the following key aspects:

1. Scientific Contribution

  • Does the manuscript offer original findings, innovative methods, or valuable applications?

  • Is the work relevant to practitioners and researchers in applied electronics or computer-related disciplines?

2. Relevance and Scope

  • Is the subject matter appropriate for IJAMEC’s thematic scope?

  • Does the research align with the journal’s focus on applied and practical methods?

3. Title and Abstract

  • Is the title informative, concise, and reflective of the content?

  • Does the abstract clearly state the purpose, methodology, key findings, and significance of the work?

4. Methodology and Reproducibility

  • Are the methods and experimental design sound, complete, and clearly presented?

  • Can the experiments, simulations, or implementations be replicated by other researchers?

5. Ethical Standards

  • Does the manuscript follow proper research ethics, including data integrity, authorship transparency, and conflict of interest disclosure?

  • Are necessary ethical approvals mentioned, if applicable?

6. Language and Presentation

  • Is the paper clearly written and logically organized?

  • Are technical descriptions, equations, figures, and tables well-integrated and readable?

  • If language issues are present, do they require minor or major revision?

7. References

  • Are the cited sources relevant, recent, and properly integrated?

  • Do the references support the discussion and show awareness of related work?

Recommendation Options

At the conclusion of your review, please select one of the following decisions:

  • Accept Submission
    The manuscript meets academic and editorial standards and requires no or only minor edits.

  • Revisions Required
    The manuscript is suitable for publication after minor changes (e.g., clarifications, language polishing, figure enhancements).

  • Resubmit for Review
    The manuscript has potential but requires significant revision in terms of content, methods, or structure. A new round of review is necessary.

  • Resubmit Elsewhere
    The topic or approach is valid but not within the scope of IJAMEC. The paper may be more suitable for a different journal.

  • Decline Submission
    The manuscript has serious scientific or methodological flaws and is not suitable for publication.

  • See Comments
    Use this if your recommendation does not fit neatly into the options above. Provide a detailed explanation in your comments.

Providing Feedback

  • Use the General Comments to the Author section to explain your evaluation constructively and respectfully. Address both strengths and weaknesses.

  • Clearly justify any “No” responses given during the evaluation process and suggest specific improvements.

  • Use the Confidential Comments to the Editor section to raise ethical concerns, plagiarism suspicions, or to explain your recommendation more candidly.

Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality

If you have a potential conflict of interest, or do not feel qualified to review the manuscript, please notify the editorial team and decline the review. All manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents during and after the review process.