Deprecated: Optional parameter $attachment_id declared before required parameter $height is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/goodlayers-core/framework/function/utility.php on line 851
Deprecated: Optional parameter $social_list declared before required parameter $url is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/goodlayers-core/include/pb/pb-element-social-share.php on line 343
Deprecated: Optional parameter $is declared before required parameter $frame_val is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/operations.class.php on line 656
Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/operations.class.php on line 2854
Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/operations.class.php on line 2858
Deprecated: Optional parameter $publishedOnly declared before required parameter $slide is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/slider.class.php on line 2280
Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/output.class.php on line 3708
Deprecated: Optional parameter $item_count declared before required parameter $app_secret is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/external-sources.class.php on line 67
Deprecated: Optional parameter $item_count declared before required parameter $app_secret is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/external-sources.class.php on line 89
Deprecated: Optional parameter $item_count declared before required parameter $current_photoset is implicitly treated as a required parameter in /home/n039c15/public_html/wp-content/plugins/revslider/includes/external-sources.class.php on line 1119 Peer Review Process – JJECI
All manuscripts submitted to the Jordanian Journal of Engineering and Chemical Industries (JJECI)are subject to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality of their underlying research methodology and argument. The Jordanian Journal of Engineering and Chemical Industries (JJECI)is committed to the highest standards of peer review. After submitting the manuscript by the author (s) in the journal management system, the manuscript will be primarily studied based on publishing experts (maximum a week). Please study carefully the guideline for authors to expedite set up the manuscript as precise as codification guidelines in the system and then submit it. If it is accepted in the first stage, the manuscript will be assessed by the editor-in-chief.
Upon receipt of the manuscript, the corresponding author is
notified and will receive the number under which the manuscript has been
registered, as well as the name and e-mail address of the scientific editor who
will handle it. From this point onwards, authors should communicate with the
editor-in-chief only about the progress of the reviewing process. The
manuscript will be sent to at least two referees and a reply may be expected at
the earliest four weeks after submission. Manuscripts can be accepted, with
minor or major revision, or rejected. If the decision is ‘revision’, the
authors are requested to take the remarks of the referees and editors into
account. A second reviewing process can follow. Upon final acceptance, the
authors provide a final version of the manuscript inappropriate file formats
(not a PDF) (text as WORD doc. and tables as Excel file) and send these to the
editor-in-chief. The authors will then be notified when the paper will be
published. Only one galley proof will be sent as a PDF file to the
corresponding author. This proof must be carefully corrected and sent back
within 2 working days.
A weekly email will be
submitted to the reviewers and the manuscript will be given back due to lack of
manuscript review after one month, then it will be sent to another reviewer. Based
on the level of the requested modifications, the viewpoints of reviewers, the
accuracy and speed of the modifications done by authors, being accepted in this
publication takes about one year (in case of final approval by
reviewers). Secretary specialist and scientific committee based on
relevant content and subject. This stage will usually take two
months. After third phase acceptance, the manuscript will be sent to two
reviewers, and then the review process of the manuscript is as follows:
– If two
reviewers reject a manuscript, it will be disapproved;
– If the opinion of
the two reviews is the total revision of the manuscript, the manuscript will be
submitted to the author for revision;
– If a
reviewer’s opinion is a general revision and the second one rejects the manuscript,
the essay will be submitted to the third reviewer and according to
his idea relevant to the first and second item, the decision will be made.
– When the author modified
the manuscript and submitted it, the manuscript would be given to another
reviewer for comparative assessment.