Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

BJET operates a double-blind peer-review system. Under this model:

  • Reviewers do not normally know the identity of the authors
  • Authors do not normally know the identity of reviewers
  • Manuscripts should be prepared to minimize identifying information
  • Reviewer identities remain confidential unless disclosure is required by applicable policy or law

Initial Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo initial editorial assessment before external peer review, covering relevance to scope, originality, compliance with submission requirements, manuscript completeness, ethical requirements, plagiarism/similarity concerns, conflicts of interest, language and presentation, research methodology, and suitability for peer review. A manuscript may be rejected without external review if it's clearly outside scope, fails essential requirements, has serious ethical concerns, or falls below the minimum standard for review — this desk rejection does not itself imply misconduct.

Selection of Reviewers

BJET normally seeks at least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise. Reviewers must not be part of the editorial team deciding the manuscript. Author-recommended reviewers may be considered, but final selection stays with the editorial team, based on expertise, independence, availability, conflicts of interest, past review performance, and diversity where possible.

Reviewer Reports

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively on originality, relevance/significance, technical/scientific quality, methodology, analysis, results, interpretation, clarity and organization, references, ethical compliance, and overall contribution — clearly distinguishing major concerns from minor corrections.

Editorial Decisions

Decisions are Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. The Editor-in-Chief (or an authorized editor) makes the final call; reviewer recommendations are advisory only.

Revision

Authors asked to revise must submit a revised manuscript plus a point-by-point response to reviewer and editorial comments. Depending on the extent of revision, the manuscript may return to the original reviewers or be evaluated directly by the editor.

Exceptions to Peer Review

Certain article types or editorial content may receive a different form of review, determined by the Editor-in-Chief and identified in the published article or journal information where relevant. BJET does not guarantee acceptance or a specific review timeframe.

This section is immediately followed in the document by Section 7, Reviewer Responsibilities (confidentiality, objectivity, conflict disclosure, declining when unqualified, no personal use of unpublished material, reporting suspected misconduct, and not uploading manuscripts to external AI tools) — let me know if you want that pulled out separately as well.