Journal of New Technology and Materials is committed to providing authors with a fair, transparent, and timely editorial process. The journal aims to handle manuscripts efficiently while maintaining rigorous academic standards, careful editorial assessment, and independent peer review.
The review timeline may vary depending on the quality of the submission, completeness of files, availability of qualified reviewers, number of revision rounds, and the responsiveness of authors. However, the journal follows the general editorial timeline described below.
Estimated Editorial Timeline
| Editorial Stage | Estimated Time |
|---|---|
| Initial editorial screening | 7 days |
| Peer-review process | 60 days |
| Acceptance to publication | 10 days |
Initial Editorial Screening
All newly submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening before being sent for peer review. This stage usually takes approximately 7 days.
During the initial screening, the editorial office and handling editor check whether the manuscript is suitable for further consideration by the journal. The screening may include an assessment of the manuscript’s relevance to the aims and scope of Journal of New Technology and Materials, completeness of submission files, formatting, language clarity, originality, ethical declarations, authorship information, references, and general scientific quality.
A manuscript may be returned to the authors for technical correction if essential information is missing. It may also be rejected at this stage if it is outside the journal’s scope, does not meet minimum scholarly standards, lacks sufficient originality, contains serious ethical concerns, or is not suitable for peer review.
Peer-Review Process
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers for scholarly evaluation. The peer-review process usually takes approximately 60 days.
The purpose of peer review is to assess the originality, scientific quality, methodological soundness, clarity, ethical compliance, relevance, and contribution of the manuscript. Reviewers are asked to provide constructive comments and recommendations to assist the editor in making an informed decision.
The editorial decision may be one of the following:
- Accept;
- Minor revision;
- Major revision;
- Reject and resubmit;
- Reject.
The review period may be extended if additional reviewers are required, if reviewer responses are delayed, if the manuscript requires specialist evaluation, or if further editorial assessment is needed.
Revision Stage
If revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewers’ and editors’ comments. The revision timeline depends on the extent of the required changes and the time taken by the authors to prepare the revised version.
Minor revisions may be assessed directly by the handling editor, while major revisions may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation. Additional review rounds may be required when substantial methodological, analytical, interpretive, or presentation issues remain unresolved.
Authors are encouraged to respond carefully to every reviewer comment and to clearly indicate all changes made in the revised manuscript.
Final Decision
After peer review and revision, the editor evaluates the reviewers’ comments, the authors’ responses, and the revised manuscript before making a final decision. Final acceptance is granted only when the manuscript satisfies the journal’s academic, ethical, and editorial requirements.
Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological reliability, relevance to the field, clarity of presentation, and compliance with journal policies.
Acceptance to Publication
Once a manuscript is formally accepted, it enters the production stage. The accepted manuscript is prepared for publication through copyediting, layout preparation, metadata checking, proof preparation, author proof review, and final online publication.
The period from acceptance to publication is usually approximately 10 days, provided that the authors respond promptly to proof corrections and no major production issues arise.
Factors That May Affect Review Speed
Although Journal of New Technology and Materials aims to follow the stated timeline, some manuscripts may require additional time. Review speed may be affected by:
- Availability of suitable reviewers;
- Complexity of the research topic;
- Need for additional technical or statistical evaluation;
- Quality and completeness of the original submission;
- Number of revision rounds required;
- Timeliness of author responses;
- Ethical, authorship, data, or conflict-of-interest issues;
- Need for language, formatting, figure, or reference corrections;
- Special editorial assessment for interdisciplinary or highly specialized work.
Commitment to Quality
Journal of New Technology and Materials values timely editorial handling, but speed does not take priority over academic quality, research integrity, and responsible peer review. The journal does not guarantee acceptance within a fixed period, and all manuscripts are evaluated according to the same scholarly and ethical standards.
The journal is committed to maintaining a review process that is efficient, fair, independent, and constructive for authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.