The Journal of International Community Engagement and Technology (JICET) implements a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific integrity of all published manuscripts. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

The review process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Screening
   Upon submission, each manuscript is evaluated by the editorial team to determine its suitability with the journal's aims and scope, compliance with the author guidelines, originality, and overall quality. Manuscripts may also be screened using plagiarism detection software.
2. Assignment to Reviewers
   Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review
   Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, significance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, validity of results, quality of discussion, ethical compliance, and contribution to knowledge. Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations to improve the manuscript.
4. Editorial Decision
   Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief or the assigned handling editor will make one of the following decisions:
   • Accept
   • Accept with Minor Revisions
   • Major Revisions Required
   • Reject
5. Revision by Authors
   Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers' comments and submit a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
6. Final Decision
   The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after considering the reviewers' evaluations and the authors' revisions. The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Relevance to the journal's aims and scope.
• Originality and novelty of the research.
• Scientific significance and contribution to the field.
• Soundness of the research methodology.
• Validity and reliability of the findings.
• Organization, clarity, and quality of writing.
• Adequacy and relevance of references.
• Compliance with ethical standards.

Review Timeline

JICET strives to provide an efficient and timely review process. The average timeline is as follows:

• Initial editorial screening: 1–2 weeks
• Peer review: 3–6 weeks
• Author revision: 2–4 weeks
• Final editorial decision: 1–2 weeks

The total review process typically takes 6–12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability, the quality of the submitted manuscript, and the extent of the required revisions.

The editorial board is committed to maintaining a fair, objective, confidential, and transparent review process that upholds the highest standards of academic publishing.