--- Review Policy
The submitted papers are subject of a double blinded peer review process, in order to select for publishing the articles meeting the highest possible standards.
IJISC reviewers are experts in the field of information security and cybercrime from academic police structures and university departments. In the reviewing process, the reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to the authors, nor are the authors’ identities disclosed to the reviewers.
When a manuscript is submitted to the International Journal of Information Security and Cybercrime (IJISC), it is initially sent to the Editorial Board for the primary evaluation in order to determine whether or not the paper fits the scope of the Journal. If the Editorial Board accept it, the paper then enters a blind reviewing process.
In the reviewing process, the Editor-in-chief sends the manuscript to an associate editor. The associate editor will forward the manuscript to two experts in the field, without the name of authors. The reviewers will consider the following evaluation criteria:
- the subject relevancy in the area of the journal topics;
- the quality of the scientific content;
- the accuracy of data, statistics and facts;
- the reasonable conclusions supported by the data;
- the correct use of the bibliographic references.
After evaluation process, the reviewers must include observations and suggestions for papers improvement that are sent to the authors, without the names of the reviewers.
Referees’ evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the paper. Most recommendations are along the lines of the following:
- to accept it;
- to accept it in the event that its authors improve it in certain ways;
- to reject it, but encourage revision and invite re-submission;
- to reject it.
If the decisions of the two reviewers are not the same (accept/reject), the paper is sent to a third reviewer. If the suggestions of reviewers for improving the paper are rejected by the author, the chief editor invites the author to reply to reviewers with the respect of anonymity. Observing the dialog, the chief editor may send the paper to additional reviewers. The final decision for publication is done by the Editor-in-chief based on the examination of reviewers and the scope of the Journal.
Due to its complexity, the review process may take between two and six months.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the quality and selection of manuscripts chosen to be published and the authors are always responsible for the content of each article.