Peer Review Process
The Journal of Dalian University of Technology (JDUT) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, transparent, and impartial peer review process. The journal follows a double-blind review system, where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential to minimize potential bias and ensure objective evaluation of submitted manuscripts.
Review Workflow:
Initial Editorial Screening:
Each submitted manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial office
to verify its suitability with the journal’s scope, formatting
requirements, and ethical publishing standards. Manuscripts that do not
meet the basic submission criteria may be returned to authors without
external review.
Reviewer Assignment:
Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are assigned to
two or more qualified subject experts from the journal’s reviewer
network. Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise,
academic experience, research contributions, and reviewing capabilities.
Double-Blind Evaluation:
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, research
methodology, scientific significance, clarity of presentation, and
contribution to the respective field. Based on their assessment,
reviewers may recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection of the
manuscript.
Author Revisions:
Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts according to the
comments and suggestions provided by reviewers. A detailed response to
reviewer comments is encouraged to support a clear and effective revision
process.
Final Decision:
The Editor-in-Chief or designated Section Editor makes the final decision
regarding publication after considering reviewer recommendations, author
responses, and the overall quality of the revised manuscript.
Post-Acceptance Checks:
Accepted manuscripts undergo final quality checks, including plagiarism
screening, formatting review, and DOI assignment before being scheduled
for publication.
Integrity & Confidentiality:
• All peer reviews are conducted confidentially.
• Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before
accepting a review assignment.
• Cases involving plagiarism or ethical misconduct are handled according
to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).