Peer Review Process

IRA Jurnal Teknik Mesin dan Aplikasinya (IRAJTMA) implements double-blind peer review process for every submitted manuscript. In this process, the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential to maintain objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity. Each manuscript is assessed based on originality, suitability to the journal's focus and scope, methodological quality, clarity of presentation, contribution to the field of mechanical engineering and its applications, and adherence to publication ethics, The following presents the stages of the peer review process:

1.  Submission of Manuscripts

The author sends the manuscript to the IRAJTMA journal, via the online system on the journal page https://e-journals.irapublishing.com/index.php/IRAJTMA/login

2.  Initial Check by Editor

Each newly submitted manuscript first goes through an initial selection process by the Editorial Team to ensure its suitability to the scope of the journal focusing on Mechanical Engineering and its Applications, as well as its compliance with the provisions of the author guidelines, publication ethics standards, and article templates. Manuscripts are checked for similarity using turnitin software, with a maximum similarity index limit of 20%. Manuscripts indicated for plagiarism, duplicate publications, or have a high level of similarity will be rejected, not proceed to the external review process, and the author will receive notification via email. Manuscripts that are deemed to meet the initial criteria will be forwarded to the next review stage.

3.  Assignment of Section Editors and Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial selection process will be assigned to a Section Editor, who will send them to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's topic for evaluation under a double-blind review system.

4.  Reviewer Assessment

Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, theoretical and methodological validity, data analysis, discussion, references, language quality, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field. The reviewers' assessment will result in a recommendation based on the following categories:

  • Accepted
  • Revisions (Minor or Major)
  • Re-submit for Review
  • Decline (Rejected)

5.  Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editor may make the following decisions:

  • Accepted
  • Revisions (Minor or Major)
  • Re-submit for Review
  • Decline (Rejected)

If the reviewers' recommendations differ significantly, the Section Editor may appoint additional reviewers before making an editorial decision.

6.  Revision by Author

If revisions are necessary, authors must revise the manuscript based on the reviewers' and editors' comments and submit responses to each comment within the specified timeframe. The revised manuscript will then be re-evaluated by the Editorial Team. If further improvements are still needed, the Section Editor may request additional revisions.

7.  Final Decision and Publication

After the revision process is complete, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Section Editors, makes a final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations and the quality of the revised manuscript. Accepted manuscripts will receive a Letter of Acceptance (LoA) and proceed to the editing, proofreading, and online publication stages.

The review and publication process generally takes 5–12 weeks, depending on the complexity of the revisions, author responses, and the journal's publication schedule. The publication order is determined by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account author diversity, topic suitability, and submission date.

The peer review process aims to assist editors in making editorial decisions regarding authors' writing. Through editorial communication, reviewers and authors can assist authors in improving the quality of their papers. The peer review process at IRAJTMA aligns with the OJS Editorial and Publishing Process, as shown in the Flowchart below.