Peer Review

Peer review process

The publishing process in the ARSTech journal is reflected in the journey diagram of the submitted manuscript. The relationship between Author, Editor, and Reviewer is also illustrated here. Each person has different duties and responsibilities. 

The author's responsibility

  1. to prepare a submitted manuscript following the guidelines and use the ARSTech journal template.
  2. to ensure all related references have been used and cited in the main texts and listed in the references.
  3. to declare the acknowledgment of all relevant funding agencies and laboratory facilities providers that have supported the research.
  4. to report any possible conflicts of interest in the submitted manuscript
  5. to declare that the submitted manuscript is not being considered or accepted elsewhere for publication,
  6. to confirm that approval was sought and obtained, if necessary, and to acquire written permission from human subjects and respect their privacy
  7. to ensure compliance with national, local, and institutional laws and requirements for any studies involving human or animal subjects
  8. to provide the Editor with a copy of any manuscript(s) submitted that might contain similar, closely related, or overlapping content
  9. upon a reasonable request, to maintain accurate records of the data associated with the manuscript submitted and to provide or provide access to such data
  10. to inform the journal editor or publisher promptly if a significant error in their publication is detected and submit an error, addendum, notice of correction, published, or withdraw the paper if necessary
  11. to revise a manuscript based on the ARSTech journal editor and reviewer's comments.
  12. to make sure that the submitted manuscript has met the basic requirement of the ARSTech journal, such as the level of similarity index, number of words, etc.

Editor's responsibilities

  1. to conduct a desk evaluation of the submitted manuscript from the authors to decide on the initial assessment. Quality criteria include journal scope, readability, novelty and ethical issues.
  2. to ensure that the submitted manuscript meets the basic standard of the ARSTech journal before assigning reviewers.
  3. to assess review comments from reviewers and make a judgment.
  4. to approve final versions offered by journal staff
  5. to read content and correct spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors
  6. to rewrite the text to make it easier for readers to understand
  7. to develop description and content ideas according to the publication's style and editorial policy
  8. to verify facts cited in material for publication
  9. to ensure that all written content has correct grammar, punctuation, and syntax.

Reviewer's responsibilities

  1. to review the manuscript objectively and timely,
  2. to inform the Editor of an appropriate decision and maintain the articles' quality published in the ARSTech journal,
  3. to preserve strict confidentiality of any information provided by the Editor or author to the reviewer in the review process,
  4. to inform the Editor of suspected plagiarism or absence of relevant, unquoted published work.
  5. to prevent possible conflicts of interest between the author and the reviewer, notify the Editor of all developments.


The ARSTech journal welcomes original research articles or review articles. Both types of manuscripts can be written in the American or British style, as long as the writing is consistent. An author must ensure that a submitted manuscript follows the ARSTech template and meets the basic requirements of scientific papers. It will be best to use the checklist provided by the ARSTech journal to ensure all items are available.


An author should register first as an author role using a valid corresponding email to submit a manuscript. It will be better to check the similarity index using tools such as Turnitin, Ithenticate, Plagiarism-Checker, etc. It is essential to make sure a manuscript is original before submitting it.


In order to maintain the quality of the ARSTech journal publications, the similarity index of submitted manuscripts must be less than 20 percent compared to open sources, and the similarity must not exceed 5 percent of each reference.

Duplicate submission

There is no tolerance for submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to different journals, and it will be removed without consideration.

Review Policy

The ARSTech journal uses a double-blind review, meaning that both author's and reviewer's identities are kept hidden during the review process. The requirements are based on technical content, format, and clarity. There are at least three stages of assessment: a) initial evaluation, b) peer review and c) recommendation.

Initial Evaluation

A Chief Editor undertakes a preliminary review to evaluate the quality of submitted manuscripts. The Chief Editor may accept unconditionally if the quality of the manuscript is considered exceptional. On the other hand, manuscripts can be immediately rejected if their quality is below the standards expected by the ARSTech journal. Of course, this decision was taken after considering judgment from the editorial team. Meanwhile, the Editors will shortly assign reviewers after considering an initial review, and the quality meets the basic criteria of the ARStech journal. This first assessment takes approximately 1-2 weeks.

Peer Review

Manuscripts passing the Editor's initial evaluation, based on their experience, will be submitted to many reviewers. At least two reviewers evaluate every paper. The reviewers are asked to review the manuscript based on its originality, methodological accuracy, research design, and relevance to design practices. Reviewers are asked to complete their reports and include individual feedback within two weeks to encourage timely publication. The Editors decide on the manuscript's acceptability after assessing the review comments from the reviewers. The editors may decide whether to accept, reject or revise. The overall peer review will be estimated to be about 4-8 weeks.

Acceptance Decision

Editors make a final judgment on manuscript acceptance based on comments and recommendations from reviewers. However, a final decision rests with the Chief-editor. It can be Accept submission, Revision required, Resubmit for review, Resubmit elsewhere, or Decline submission. From manuscript submission to final decision, it is estimated to take between 5-10 weeks, subject to the availability of reviewers in line with the substance of the submitted manuscript.