eISSN : 2383-7632
Journal Information  l  e-Submission  l  View-FullText
Journal Information > Editor's & Reviewer's Guide

Journal of Multimedia Information System


Peer Review Process


All manuscripts are treated as confidential. They are peer-reviewed by two or three anonymous reviewers selected by the editor and section editors. The associated editor selects two referees who have expertise in the area associated with the submitted manuscript. If the review results from the reviewers are in conflict, the manuscript will be sent to the third reviewer. The final recommendation on the manuscript is made by the editorial board. Letters to the Editor are reviewed and published on the decision of the editor. The corresponding author is notified as soon as possible of the editor's decision to accept, reject, or request revision of manuscripts. When the final revised manuscript is completely acceptable according to the JMIS format and criteria, it is scheduled for publication in the next available issue.



Review consideration


  1. Academic aspects

a) Does the content of the manuscript match the scope of the journal?

b) Is the research original, novel and important to the field?

c) Is the thought process clear? Is clear language used?

d) Is the writing of sufficient quality to allow the above points to be evaluated?

e) Will it impact the thoughts or actions of its readers?    

  2. Quality Level of manuscript

a) Is the manuscript appropriately organized?

b) Is the manuscript an appropriate length?

 c) Is the title informative?

d) Does the abstract give a clear summary of the results of the manuscript?

e) Does the introduction summarizes the fundamentals, gives a critical evaluation of the previous

    research on the topic, and objectives?

f) Does the description of the methods and/or the experimental work is adequate?

g) Does the references cover the recent and the past activities in the field including papers reported

    in all journals of the field?

h) Does the number and the quality of the figures and the tables are suitable?

i) Is the conclusion comprehensive?

j) Is the manuscript correct in grammar?