Peer Review Process


A manuscript will be reviewed for possible publication with the understanding that it is being submitted exclusively to EJCM and has not been published, simultaneously submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere.


Editor will screen all submitted manuscripts initially for suitability for formal review. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious scientific or technical flaws, irrelevant to the journal readers or lack of a significant message will be rejected at this stage. Manuscripts are judged on the interest and importance of the topic, intellectual and scientific strength, clarity of presentation and relevance to Journal readers. Among the other factors considered is the strength of the paper compared with that of other papers under review.


Manuscripts that are found suitable for publication will be sent to at least two peer reviewers. During submission, the author is requested to provide names of two qualified reviewers who have had experience in the subject of the submitted manuscript. In case two independent reviewers cannot be secured, one reviewer and one editor will be required before acceptance/rejection. The reviewers should not be affiliated with the same institutes of the authors.


All manuscripts will be reviewed using Double-Blind Review methods; both the reviewer and the author remain anonymous. Author anonymity prevents any reviewer bias based on the author’s country of origin or previous controversial work. Articles written by prestigious or renowned authors are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than on the author’s reputation. The journal is committed to providing an efficient service for both, authors and readers. Our blind peer-review system along with the editorial board of independent editors provides a mean of rapid and fair publication decisions. Every manuscript is also assigned to a member of the editorial team, who based on the comments from the reviewers takes a final decision on the manuscript. The comments and suggestions (acceptance/ rejection/ amendments in manuscript) received from reviewers are conveyed to the corresponding author.


Full peer-review process including editorial workflow can be understood through the following flow chart:



The author is requested to provide a point by point response to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. In addition, they are expected to mark the changes as yellow highlighted in the article. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript. The revised version of the manuscript should be submitted online in a manner similar to that used for the submission of the manuscript for the first time. However, there is no need to submit the “Title page/covering letter” file while submitting a revised version.

The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor's decision is final. Editors are not involved in decisions about papers that they have written themselves or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any such submission is subject to all of the journal's usual procedures, with peer review handled independently of the relevant editor and their research groups

Review Deadline 

In order to expedite review process, reviewers are asked to complete the review within three weeks of receipt of the original manuscript. Reminders of deadlines will be sent to the reviewers from the Publications Office in pursuit of this deadline.

Review Criteria 
For a recommendation of acceptance for publication, the following two criteria are necessary: ORIGINALITY (innovation or novelty) and PRESENTATION (a well-written manuscript within the scope of EJCM). Reviewers are asked to evaluate both the quality of the technical contribution and the quality of the presentation. In addition, the manuscript must be new and previously unpublished with interesting contributions to ICT convergence. Given that EJCM focuses mainly on ICT convergence and its applications, manuscripts do not necessarily include lots of mathematics to imply that the problems under consideration are worth solving. It is rather important for reviewers to evaluate the manuscripts whether the contributions are interesting and potentially relevant to a fundamental problem/question in convergence of information and communication technology or some related application domains.

First-round review:

Accept - An accept decision means that an editor is accepting the paper with no further modifications. The paper will not be seen again by the editor or by the reviewers.

Reject - The manuscript is not suitable for the EJCM publication.

Revisions - The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within 14 days and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.

Second round review:

Accept - The paper is accepted without any further changes.

Reject - The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.

Note that decision revise is not allowed to any manuscripts other than the original version.