Quick Links


Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement


The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers are based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the IJRAT submission guideline policies.


Section A: Publication and authorship

All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international/national reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.

The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.

The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.

If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.

Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

No research can be included in more than one publication.


Section B: Authors' responsibilities

Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.

Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.

Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.

Authors must participate in the peer review process.

Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.

Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.

Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.

Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.


Section C: Reviewers' responsibilities

Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.

Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author

Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Section D: Editors' responsibilities

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.

Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.

Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.

Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.

Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.

Editors should have a clear picture of a research's funding sources.

Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.

Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.



Peer Review Policy of IJRAT

  • IJRAT has assigned ISSN-2321-9637 by National Science Library (NSL), National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources (NISCAIR), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, New Delhi, India.
  • The Journal IJRAT applies a double-blind peer review policy.
  • On receipt of manuscript, all manuscripts shall be subject to an editorial pre-screening process to assess suitability for the journal.
  • Manuscripts that pass this initial screening process will be sent to reviewers in a double-blind peer review process of evaluation.
  • Passing this initial screening does not guarantee that the manuscript will be accepted for publication.
  • If required, it is also sent to specific subject referee for review.
  • The author is communicated with available comments from the editor/referee for corrections/revision.
  • After satisfactory report from editor/referee, the paper is again reviewed by the Chief Editor for final acceptance of paper.
  • Names of reviewer/referee are not disclosed.
  • Final responsibility for the selection and acceptance of manuscripts forpublication rests with the Editors.

Copyright 2013-2018 IJRAT - International Journal of Research in Advent Technology. All Rights Reserved.