Journal Cover – Impact in Computics

Impact in Computics

Peer-Reviewed • Open Access e-ISSN: 3122-7341

Submit Your Manuscript

Peer Review Policy

Impact in Computics is committed to rigorous, ethical, and transparent peer review. The journal follows a single-blind review process: reviewers remain anonymous to authors, while authors’ identities are visible to reviewers. The review system is aligned with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Overview of the Review Process

  1. Initial Screening – All submissions undergo checks for completeness, formatting compliance, and plagiarism according to the journal’s policies.
  2. Editor Assignment – An Associate Editor evaluates the manuscript for relevance, clarity, and scientific contribution.
  3. Reviewer Selection – A minimum of two independent experts are invited to review.
  4. Peer Review – Reviewers evaluate originality, methodological soundness, technical correctness, ethical integrity, and clarity of presentation.
  5. Editorial Decision – Based on reviewer feedback, the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor makes one of the following decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
  6. Revision Stage – Authors must submit a point-by-point response addressing all reviewer comments.
  7. Final Acceptance – Once all issues are resolved, the manuscript proceeds to production and is published immediately under the journal’s continuous publication model.

2. Review Criteria

  • Relevance to the journal’s aims and scope
  • Originality and contribution to the field
  • Scientific validity, methodology, and technical accuracy
  • Clarity of presentation and organization
  • Compliance with ethical research and reporting standards

3. Continuous Publication Model

The journal does not publish in periodic issues. Accepted articles are added immediately to the active volume to ensure rapid dissemination.

4. Reviewer Confidentiality

Reviewer identities are strictly confidential and are never disclosed to authors. Manuscripts and review reports are treated as privileged documents.

5. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a detailed, evidence-based justification. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and may involve consultation with additional experts. Decisions made after appeal are final.