Peer Review Policy

1. Purpose of Peer Review

At Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology, we value honesty, fairness, and academic quality. Peer review is a key step that helps us publish reliable and important scientific work. This policy explains how we review submissions and what is expected from authors, reviewers, and editors.

2. Review System We Use

We follow a double-blind peer review process. This means:

Reviewers do not know who the authors are.
Authors do not know who the reviewers are.

This helps keep the reviews fair and free from bias.

3. How Manuscripts Are Reviewed

Initial Check by Editors:
All new submissions go through an early check to ensure:

The topic fits our journal.
The format is correct.
The work is original and ethical (we use tools like Turnitin or iThenticate to check for plagiarism).

Peer Review Process:
If the paper passes the first check, we send it to at least two experts in the field. They are selected based on their qualifications and experience.

What Reviewers Look For:

Is the work original?
Are the methods and ideas solid?
Is the paper well-organized and easy to understand?
Does it match the goals of our journal?
Are the references relevant and complete?

Decisions After Review:

Accepted as it is
Needs minor changes
Needs major changes
Rejected

Authors receive a decision letter along with feedback from reviewers. If revisions are needed, authors must submit a detailed response letter explaining the changes they’ve made. Sometimes the revised paper goes back to reviewers for another look.

4. Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers are trusted to:

Give helpful, honest, and unbiased feedback.
Keep everything confidential.
Judge the paper fairly, without considering the author’s background or identity.
Let us know if they have a conflict of interest.
Never use ideas or text from the manuscript for their own use.

We follow the ethical rules suggested by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

5. Duties of Authors

Authors must make sure that:

The work is their own and hasn’t been published or submitted elsewhere.
All sources are clearly cited.
Research involving people or animals follows ethical rules.
Any conflicts of interest are declared.
They work with editors and reviewers to improve their paper.

Authors can suggest possible reviewers, but the journal has the final say.

6. Editorial Responsibility

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team:

Oversee the whole peer review process.
Make final decisions based on reviewer input and their own judgment.
Handle all submissions fairly and keep the review process private.
Avoid working on papers where they have a conflict of interest.

7. Privacy and Security

All manuscripts and review discussions are kept confidential. We follow international rules for data protection and privacy.

8. Conflict of Interest

Everyone involved—authors, reviewers, editors—must declare any personal, academic, or financial conflicts. If a hidden conflict is found, the journal may reject or retract the paper.

9. Appeals and Complaints

If an author disagrees with our decision, they can send a formal appeal with a clear explanation. A senior editor (not involved in the original decision) will review the case.

If there are complaints about ethics or misconduct, we follow the COPE guidelines.