Peer Review Process

Knowledge Journals shall not accept or publish manuscripts in its online journals without prior peer review. There shall be a review process of manuscripts by independent referees who are conversant in the pertinent subject area. Editors shall follow the review process which shall be clearly defined. Authors should strive for maximum clarity of expression, bearing in mind that the purpose of publication is the disclosure of technical knowledge and that an excessively complex or poorly written presentation can only obscure the significance of the work presented. Material which is not essential to the continuity of the text (e.g., proofs, derivations, or calculations) be placed in Appendices.

Referees shall treat the contents of papers under review as privileged information not to be disclosed to others before publication. It is expected that no one with access to a paper under review will make any inappropriate use of the special knowledge which that access provides.

The editor evaluates the recommendation and notifies the author of the manuscript status. The manuscript may be:

  • Accepted for publication as is;
  • Accepted for publication with minor changes, with no re-review necessary;
  • Accepted for publication after substantial revision and additional review; or
  • Rejected

The comments of the anonymous reviewers will be forwarded to the authors, and when the authors are ready to submit their revised manuscript, read the comments of the editors and reviewers, and respond to them by telling what modifications they have made in their manuscript or why they have not made the suggested changes. Note that revisions must be completed and submitted after the authors received the reviewers' comments.

Material which has been previously copyrighted, published, or accepted for publication will not be considered for publication in Knowledge Journals.

Responsibilities of Manuscript Authors

  • Peer review is essential to scientific and technical discourse. Authors are encouraged to have the first formal publication of their results be a peer-reviewed paper.
  • Financial support of the work being reported and of the authors should be clearly acknowledged, as should any potential conflict of interest.
  • Methods and materials should be described in sufficient detail to permit evaluation and replication.
  • All data should be presented upon request by the editor, to facilitate the review process.
  • Authors have an obligation to correct errors promptly.
  • Knowledge Journals research defines plagiarism as the use of someone else’s prior ideas, processes, results, or words without explicitly acknowledging the original author and source. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and is considered a serious breach of professional conduct, with potentially severe ethical and legal consequences.
  • Fabrication and falsification are unacceptable.
  • Authors should only submit original work that has neither appeared elsewhere for publication, nor which is under review for another refereed publication. If authors have used their own previously published work(s) as a basis for a new submission, they are required to cite the previous work(s) and very briefly indicate how the new submission offers substantively novel contributions beyond those of the previously published work(s).
  • Note: Authors should not discuss any aspect of a manuscript under evaluation with reviewers of the submitted manuscript. Manuscript evaluation with reviewers of the submitted manuscript.
  • Only those articles of a researcher’s publication record that are directly relevant to the subject matter of the paper under consideration should be included in the bibliography. Furthermore, an article should be appropriately labeled as "submitted" when still in the review process or "in press" when it has been accepted for publication but has not yet appeared in print
  • Knowledge Journals assumes that the material submitted to its journals for publications is properly available for general dissemination to the readership of those journals. It is the responsibility of the authors, not the IJRAS, to determine whether disclosure of their material requires the prior consent of other parties and, if so, to obtain it. If authors make use of charts, photographs, or other graphical or textual material from previously published material, the authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to use the material in the manuscript.

Referees of Manuscripts

The selection of referees is based on a number of criteria that include:

  • Some-one who is knowledgeable in the techniques of analysis that are being employed;
  • Some-one is familiar with the topic area of the paper being reviewed;
  • Some-one whose work is cited by the author;
  • Some-one who has published on the same topic previously;

The journal uses a minimum of 2 referees, and thus in a number of cases we do not expect referees to exactly replicate each other - but across all referees the required criteria will be met. In addition, the journal will often use people with technical expertise from different fields.

Editors of Knowledge Journals

  • The sole responsibility for acceptance or rejection of a manuscript rests with the editor.
  • Editors should generally grant the request of an author who asks that particular individual(s) be excluded from the review of a particular manuscript.
  • Editors should establish a review process that minimizes bias.
  • Editors should subject all manuscripts of a given type to equivalent and unprejudiced reviews. Decisions about acceptance for publication should occur in a reasonable time frame, and (except for issues devoted to special topics) manuscripts should, to the editor’s best ability, be published in the chronological order of acceptance.
  • Editors should provide to the authors a written rationale for editorial decisions regarding a manuscript submitted for publication. This is especially important if the manuscript is being rejected.
  • Unpublished manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents by all individuals involved in the editorial process.
  • Editors should correct errors in a manuscript if the errors are detected or reported before publication, or publish corrections if they are detected afterward.
  • Editors should handle cases of alleged misconduct at the lowest possible organizational level, and should usually involve the institutions at which the research in question was performed.
  • Papers submitted by an editor or associate editor should be handled by another member of the editorial board.

Code of Ethics

Since we are the members of the global research community and are directly or indirectly responsible for improvisation in technology thus affecting the quality of life throughout the world, and in accepting a personal obligation to our profession, we commit ourselves to the highest ethical and professional conduct and agree:

  • To accept responsibility in making research related decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the public.
  • To be Honest and Fair.
  • To strive for technical excellence in the engineering profession by maintaining and enhancing our own knowledge and skills. Not to steal property, time or resources.
  • To avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest whenever possible. When possible to demonstrate our performance capability with our skills via projects, leadership, and/or accredited educational programs and will encourage others to do so as well. Not to hesitate to seek assistance or guidance when faced with a task beyond our abilities or experience.
  • To embrace other professionals' advice and learn from their experiences and mistakes.
  • To treat this as an opportunity to learn new techniques and approaches. When the situation arises that our assistance is called upon.
  • To respond willingly to share our knowledge with others.
  • To reject bribery, kickbacks and professional misconduct in all its forms.
  • To strive to convey any knowledge (specialist or otherwise) that we have gained to others so everyone gains the benefit of each other's knowledge. To improve the understanding of technology, its appropriate application, and potential consequences.
  • To seek, accept, and offer honest criticism of technical work, to acknowledge and correct errors, and to credit properly the contributions of others.
  • To treat fairly all persons regardless of such factors as race, religion, gender, disability, age, or national origin. Admit mistakes and correct them promptly. Not to injure others, their property, reputation, or employment by false or malicious action. Not to use availability and access to information for personal gains through corporate espionage.
  • To distinguish between advocacy and Science and not to present analysis and opinion as fact.
  • To respect intellectual property and will be careful to give credit for other's work. Never to steal or misuse copyrighted, patented material, trade secrets or any other intangible asset.
  • To assist colleagues and co-workers in their professional development and to support them in following this code of ethics.