Peer Review Process

NextGen Innovations in Computing and Technology (NICT) adopts a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer review system to ensure the scientific integrity, accuracy, and contribution of each manuscript submitted for publication. The review process is designed to promote objectivity, uphold ethical publishing standards, and provide constructive feedback for authors.

Overview of the Review Process

  1. Submission Screening
    The Editor-in-Chief or assigned Section Editor conducts an initial screening to evaluate the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s scope, adherence to formatting guidelines, language quality, and originality (checked via plagiarism detection tools such as Turnitin).
  2. Editorial Decision – Desk Review
    Manuscripts that fail to meet the journal’s criteria are rejected at this stage with editorial comments. Suitable manuscripts proceed to the peer review phase.
  3. Assignment to Reviewers
    The manuscript is assigned to at least two independent experts in the field. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous (double-blind review). Reviewer selection is based on expertise, availability, and absence of conflict of interest.
  4. Peer Review Evaluation
    Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, methodology, clarity, ethical soundness, and contribution to the field. They submit a detailed evaluation report along with a recommendation:
    • Accept
    • Minor Revision
    • Major Revision
    • Reject
  5. Editorial Decision and Notification
    The editor considers all reviewer reports and makes an informed decision. Authors receive notification along with anonymized reviewer comments.
  6. Revision and Resubmission
    Authors are invited to revise the manuscript according to reviewer feedback. Revised submissions may be re-reviewed by the same reviewers or evaluated directly by the editor.
  7. Final Acceptance
    After satisfactory revisions, the manuscript is accepted for publication and enters the production stage.
  8. Copyediting and Publication
    Accepted manuscripts undergo professional editing, formatting, and typesetting before publication in the upcoming issue and assignment of DOI.

Review Timeline

The peer review process at NICT is designed to be efficient and author-friendly. On average:

  • Initial editorial screening: 3–5 days
  • Peer review duration: 2–4 weeks
  • Revision and final decision: 1–3 weeks

The total turnaround time from submission to first decision is typically 4–6 weeks.

Ethical Responsibilities

All parties involved in the peer review process—editors, reviewers, and authors—are expected to adhere to the ethical standards outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  • Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, declare conflicts of interest, and provide fair and timely feedback.
  • Editors ensure unbiased decision-making and confidentiality of all submitted materials.
  • Authors must submit original work, disclose any competing interests, and address reviewer comments in full.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions may submit an appeal with a detailed justification. Appeals are reviewed by an independent senior editor or a member of the advisory board. Complaints related to the review process or ethical misconduct will be investigated thoroughly in accordance with COPE procedures.

Transparency and Integrity

NICT is committed to a fair and accountable review process. All review activities are documented, and communication is handled through the OJS platform to maintain an audit trail. Reviewers receive recognition for their contribution while preserving author anonymity.