The Journal of Operation and Automation in Power Engineering (JOAPE) is committed to maintaining a rigorous double-blind peer review process, following the COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices. The journal also adheres to the publication standards outlined in the "Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing," updated on 15 September 2022, by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA).
Decisions on whether to publish a manuscript are based on an initial editorial review followed by a double-blind peer review. Initially, all submissions are evaluated by an editorial committee, which includes at least two members of the editorial team, including the Editor-in-Chief. The goal at this stage is to determine whether a manuscript should be sent for external peer review or quickly rejected, allowing authors to submit their work elsewhere if necessary.
While editorials and letters might be accepted at this stage, most manuscripts are either rejected or forwarded for external peer review by at least three qualified reviewers. Manuscripts that do not meet basic standards, lack a significant novel contribution, or have unclear relevance may be rejected early in the process. Sometimes, manuscripts are returned to the authors with revision requests to help the editors decide whether to proceed with a full review. Authors can generally expect a decision from this stage within 1–2 weeks of submission.
Manuscripts that move forward are reviewed by external experts under the supervision of a section editor and the Editor-in-Chief. The double-blind review process ensures that the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential. We strive to complete the peer review process within 4-8 weeks, although delays can occur. Authors are advised to wait at least six weeks before inquiring about the status of their submission. The Editor-in-Chief has the final say on whether a manuscript is accepted for publication.
Reviewers play a crucial role in upholding the quality of JOAPE. In our double-blind peer review system, reviewers must keep their identities confidential. Reviewers should decline an invitation to review if they feel unqualified, if they cannot complete the review promptly, or if there is a conflict of interest.
All submissions are confidential, and no reviewer should share a manuscript with others without editorial approval. Reviewers are expected to ensure that the manuscripts they review are of high quality and original work. If a reviewer suspects that a manuscript is under consideration elsewhere, they should inform the editor.
Reviewers should evaluate each manuscript based on its structure, purpose, objectives, methodology, introduction, conclusions, references, grammar, plagiarism, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Their comments significantly influence whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected. Reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed, unbiased feedback to improve the quality of the journal.
All manuscripts submitted to JOAPE undergo double-blind peer review. We consider peer review as the cornerstone of maintaining the quality and integrity of academic research. As a reviewer, you will advise the editors, who make the final publication decision, supported by an editorial committee for most research articles.
Unpublished manuscripts are confidential, and reviewers must treat them as such. Reviewers should not discuss the manuscript with colleagues and must not make copies. After submitting a review, reviewers should destroy any copies of the manuscript they have, as editors do not retain copies of rejected manuscripts. Reviewer comments should not be published without permission from the reviewer, author, and editor.
Despite the double-blind review process, the research community can be close-knit, leading to potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers may recognize an author’s work and should disclose any significant conflicts of interest to the editor. If a conflict could lead to bias, whether positive or negative, it’s better to decline the review request. Reviewers are encouraged to focus solely on the manuscript, avoiding personal judgment or criticism, which will help authors improve their work.
If you have any concerns regarding conflicts of interest or ethical issues with a manuscript, please contact the JOAPE Editorial Office via the journal’s official email.