Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The peer review process for articles submitted to the Unified Systems Approach for Human-Centered Operations (USAHO) is designed to ensure the quality, originality, scientific rigor, and integrity of published research in Industrial Engineering and related disciplines.

1. Peer Review Type

The Unified Systems Approach for Human-Centered Operations (USAHO) applies a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This approach promotes fairness, impartiality, and objective evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

2. Editorial and Review Process

Initial Screening (Desk Evaluation)

Upon submission, every manuscript is evaluated by the Editorial Office to ensure:

  • The manuscript falls within the journal's scope of Industrial Engineering and related fields.

  • Compliance with the journal's author guidelines and formatting requirements.

  • Sufficient scientific quality, originality, and academic merit.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these requirements may be rejected without external review.

Plagiarism Check

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software to ensure originality and prevent academic misconduct. Manuscripts with unacceptable similarity levels may be returned for revision or rejected.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area, including but not limited to:

  • Industrial Engineering Systems

  • Operations and Production Management

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics

  • Supply Chain and Logistics Management

  • Quality Engineering

  • Systems Engineering

  • Operations Research and Optimization

  • Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma

  • Engineering Management

  • Industry 4.0 and Smart Manufacturing

  • Sustainable Manufacturing

  • Decision Analysis and Data-Driven Systems

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, and publication records. The review process follows internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the Editor may issue one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revision

  • Major Revision

  • Reject

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal's scope.

  • Originality and contribution to Industrial Engineering knowledge.

  • Scientific significance and innovation.

  • Adequacy of literature review and theoretical foundation.

  • Methodological rigor and research validity.

  • Quality of data analysis and interpretation.

  • Practical implications for industrial systems and engineering practice.

  • Clarity of writing, organization, and presentation.

  • Compliance with ethical and academic standards.

4. Review Timeline

USAHO is committed to providing an efficient and timely review process.

  • Average review time: 1–3 weeks

  • First editorial decision: approximately 2–4 weeks after submission.

The actual review duration may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript revisions.

5. Ethical Standards and Transparency

USAHO adheres to internationally recognized publication ethics and follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process.

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback.

  • Evaluate manuscripts solely on scientific merit without discrimination.

6. Author Revisions

Authors are required to:

  • Address all reviewer comments thoroughly and systematically.

  • Submit a detailed response letter explaining how each comment has been addressed.

  • Resubmit the revised manuscript within the deadline specified by the Editorial Office.

Failure to comply with these requirements may result in rejection of the manuscript.

7. Final Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after considering:

  • Reviewer recommendations.

  • Quality of the revised manuscript.

  • Scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal's scope.

The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to make the final publication decision.

8. Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed through the following publication stages:

  • Copyediting

  • Proofreading

  • Layout editing and formatting

  • Final author proof approval

  • Online publication

All published articles are made freely available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, ensuring immediate Open Access to readers worldwide.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal appeal supported by clear academic justification. Appeals are reviewed objectively by the Editorial Board, and an additional independent reviewer may be appointed when necessary.

Complaints concerning editorial procedures or publication ethics will be handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

10. General Provisions

  • The Editorial Board may appoint additional reviewers whenever necessary to ensure a fair and comprehensive evaluation.

  • Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts at any stage if plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, falsification, or other forms of research misconduct are identified.

  • The Editorial Board may request additional revisions whenever necessary to improve the scientific quality of a manuscript before publication.

  • All editorial decisions are based solely on scientific quality, originality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the scope of Unified Systems Approach for Human-Centered Operations (USAHO).