Peer Review and Ethics

Peer Review Process

Computing Technology Research Journal (CTRJ) follows a double-blind peer-review process. The identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process to ensure an unbiased and objective evaluation.

Reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Editorial Board Member based on their expertise and research experience in the subject area of the submitted manuscript.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive comments based on the following criteria:

Originality and novelty of the research
Scientific and technical quality
Methodological soundness
Clarity of presentation and organization
Significance and contribution to the field
Appropriateness of references and citations
Ethical compliance and research integrity

Reviewers should provide clear recommendations and supporting comments to assist both the authors and the editorial team.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, discuss, or use any unpublished material without prior authorization from the Editor.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline the review invitation if they have any personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflict of interest with the authors or the submitted work.

Review Timeline

Reviewers are requested to accept or decline the review invitation as soon as possible. Once a review invitation has been accepted, the review report should normally be submitted within 7–14 days.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief may make one of the following decisions:

Accept
Accept with Minor Revisions
Major Revisions Required
Reject

The final publication decision rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.

Publication Ethics

Reviewers are expected to follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and report any concerns regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, or other forms of research misconduct to the Editor.