•  
  •  
 

Policies

Peer Review Process

Engineering and Technology Journal (ETJ) uses a double-blind peer-review system to assure the quality of the publication. All manuscripts should be submitted through our online manuscript management system. The author should first register in our system and then submit their manuscript. ETJ depends mostly on international and national reviewers. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The peer-review process mainly follows three steps, starting as the manuscript is submitted by the author to ETJ:

Step 1

As soon as the journal editorial office receives the manuscript, it will be checked and assessed by the journal editorial office and the editor. The initial desk assessment includes:

  • Checking with iThenticate for plagiarism. The manuscript must not have a similarity index higher than 20%.
  • Determining if the manuscript covers a suitable topic and fits the aims and scope of the journal.
  • Ensuring the manuscript meets the basic requirements of the journal's guidelines and instructions for authors, such as word count, clarity of the English language, and format.
  • Assessing if the submission makes a significant contribution to the existing literature.
  • Checking for an abstract with suitable word count, affiliation details of the author, figures, tables, and their citation in the text.
  • Verifying author's contributions, declaration of competing interest, funding, and data availability statement.
  • Assessing commitment to high-quality research and ethical standards.
  • Ensuring standards of reliability to qualify for further review.

If the submitted manuscript does not pass the initial checklist, the editor might reject the manuscript. If the manuscript does pass the initial checklist, it will transfer to the second step (i.e., peer review).

Step 2

The editor will select and contact at least two reviewers who are experts in the field of the manuscript and ask them to review the manuscript. The reviewers will be asked to advise the editor whether the manuscript is suitable for publication in ETJ according to the following observations:

  • The manuscript fits the scope of ETJ.
  • The novelty or originality of the study.
  • The suitable description of the study design and methodology.
  • Experimental and theoretical sections, results, and discussion are appropriately and clearly presented.
  • The conclusions of the manuscript are trustworthy, significant, and supported by the research work.

Once the editor has received the reviewers' reports, the decision will be shared with the author along with any additional guidance. The final decision could be:

  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject
  • Others

The author(s) will often need to revise their manuscript and resubmit the revised version with a response to the reviewers’ comments, or the manuscript may be rejected.

Step 3

If the editor and reviewers have recommended a minor or major revision, the author can amend the manuscript based on the reviewers' comments. The author should then resubmit the revised manuscript with the response to reviewers’ comments as a separate file. Upon resubmission, the editor will review the revised version and send it for a second round of peer review, asking the reviewers to check the adequacy of the response.

Finally, if the revisions have brought the manuscript up to the requirement of ETJ, it will be transferred to production.

Authorship Guidelines

Engineering and Technology Journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines. To qualify for authorship, authors must satisfy the following:

  • Substantial contributions to conception or design of the work; or acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
  • Drafting the work or revising it critically for intellectual content.
  • Final approval of the version to be published.
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and accuracy of any part of the work.

Contributors not qualifying for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments. Changes to the author list during or after publication require approval by all authors, including those removed. ETJ reserves the right to request evidence of authorship. Changes to authorship after acceptance are at the discretion of ETJ.

Criteria for Authorship

  • Substantial intellectual contributions required for authorship (e.g., research question, design, analysis, interpretation).
  • Technical services, translation, patient identification, material supply, funding or administrative oversight alone are not sufficient for authorship but may be acknowledged.
  • One author (“guarantor”) should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole.
  • All authors should approve the final manuscript version and ideally be familiar with all aspects of the work.
  • Team contributions may be limited to specific aspects for some authors.

Number of Authors

Editors should not arbitrarily limit the number of authors. For multi-center trials, a subset may be listed as preparing the manuscript on behalf of contributors. Corporate or group authorship is allowed if one investigator takes responsibility. All listed must meet criteria for authorship. If the number of authors is unusually large, editors may require a detailed description of contributions. Names of those not meeting the criteria may be removed.

Order of Authorship

Authors themselves decide the order of listing based on respective contributions and agreements. The meaning of the order should be described by the authors if relevant.

Authorship Disputes

Disputes are best settled locally before journal review. Editors may become involved at their discretion. Changes in authorship at any stage of review or acceptance should be accompanied by a written request and explanation from all original authors.

User License Agreement

ETJ provides access to archived material through ETJ archives. All open access articles are free to read and download. Permitted reuse is defined by the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).

Deceased Authors

If a manuscript includes a deceased author or one passes during review, inform the editorial office. If the corresponding author is deceased, the group should nominate a replacement. The contribution and conflicts of the deceased author must be confirmed. Upon publication, a note will be added under the author list.

Conflict of Interest

Authors must clearly state conflicts of interest and upload the conflict of interest form during submission. A clear statement should be included in the manuscript.

Responsibilities on Conflicts of Interest

Public trust and published article credibility depend on handling conflicts of interest transparently. Financial relationships (employment, consultancies, stock, honoraria, patents, expert testimony) are most identifiable and may undermine credibility. Other conflicts may arise from personal relationships, competition, or beliefs. All participants in publication—authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board—must consider and disclose any potential conflicts.

Authors

Authors must disclose all financial and personal relationships that could bias their work.

Reviewers

Reviewers are asked about conflicts when assigned a manuscript. They must disclose any conflicts to editors, recuse themselves if bias may exist, and must not use knowledge of the manuscript to further their interests.

Editors

Editors who make final decisions on manuscripts should recuse themselves from decisions if conflicts or potential conflicts exist. Other editorial staff must provide a description of their financial interests or conflicts and recuse themselves as appropriate.

Reporting Conflicts of Interest

  • Articles should publish statements or supporting documents declaring:
    • Authors’ conflicts of interest
    • Sources of support for the work, including sponsor names and the role of sponsors in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, and decision to publish (or a statement that the source had no involvement)
    • Access to study data, with explanation of nature and extent of access
  • Editors may require authors of funded studies to sign a statement confirming full data access and responsibility for integrity and accuracy.

Appeals and Complaints

Readers who have concerns or complaints about published papers should first contact the corresponding author to attempt a resolution directly, before contacting the Editorial Office.

The Editorial Office may be contacted in cases where it is not appropriate to contact the authors, if the authors were not responsive, or if the concerns were not resolved. The Editorial Office will coordinate with the complainant, author(s), Editors-in-Chief, or Editorial Board members for the investigation, remedy, or resolution of any concerns or complaints.

Complaints, comments, or update requests relating to scholarly validity, ethical or legal aspects of either the paper or its review process will be investigated further where appropriate. All complaints, comments, or update requests relating to published papers are investigated by the Editorial Office with the support of the Editorial Board and final approval by the Editor-in-Chief. For ethical concerns, final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board members, who are supported by the Editorial Office to promote adherence to core principles of publication ethics as expressed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Other persons and institutions may be consulted as necessary, including university authorities or experts in the field. Legal counsel may be sought where the complaint has legal implications.

Personal comments or criticisms will not be entertained. All complaints are investigated, including anonymous complaints. Complainants may request that the Editorial Office handle their complaint confidentially, and the Editorial Office, Editors-in-Chief, or other Editorial Board members will attempt to do so as appropriate and in accordance with our procedures.

Decisions about Corrections, Comments and Replies, Expressions of Concerns, or Retractions resulting from an investigation are made by Editors-in-Chief or Editorial Board members and communicated to authors.

If a complaint is not considered substantiated, further communication will only be considered if additional information evidencing concerns is presented.

Complainants might not be updated about the status of an investigation until a final decision has been reached; however, complainants will be notified if an update is published. The Editorial Office and Editorial Board members are under no obligation to present further detail. Communication will be ended where it is not considered cordial or respectful. Readers with complaints or concerns should be aware that investigations take time to conduct.

How to Raise Concerns

When raising concerns to the Editorial Office, please contact us at etj@uotechnology.edu.iq. Details about the paper should be included in the complaint email. Also, include details of the complaint, its scholarly, scientific or academic validity, a summary of the main points and any other issues, details of any correspondence already had with the authors, and a statement clarifying any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

Allegations of Misconduct

ETJ is very sensitive to research misconduct and uses all means available to prevent publishing miscounted research. The Council of Editors defines research misconduct broadly in three categories of action and conducts. ETJ uses this definition of misconduct in dealing with the issue and strictly follows the COPE charts in dealing with research misconduct.

In addition, for each component of the research misconduct, ETJ has many assurance policies as follows:

  • Mistreatment of research subjects
  • Falsification and Fabrication of data
  • Piracy and Plagiarism

Protection of Animal rights

ETJ does not publish manuscripts that do not declare a statement about the protection of animal rights. Normally, the journal requires that a statement is declared that research has been reviewed by an institutional review board either in the material method section of the manuscript or in the acknowledgment section of the manuscript. In addition, ETJ encourages authors to report the registry number of the council certification.

Falsification and Fabrication of data

Fabrication is defined as making up data without actually collecting or synthesizing scientific data. Falsification is defined as manipulating research material to reach a favorable result. Fabrication and falsification could happen at any research stage (in the field) up to the publication of a manuscript where citation can be misused (referencing a citation when the citation does not support the argument). ETJ tries to identify any kind of fabrication or falsification in all levels of manuscript processing, from initial screening to comprehensive evaluation of a revised manuscript and even after a manuscript has been published.

Reporting any fabrication and falsification is an ethical duty of our authors, co-authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. In any event of falsification or fabrication, ETJ keeps its right to retract or withdraw the fabricated or falsified article. ETJ strictly follows the COPE charts in dealing with fabrication and falsification.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Another category of plagiarism is self-plagiarism, when the author published his own idea, data, and text in different journals when no need for such duplication exists. ETJ uses all means to detect plagiarism. As a matter of quality assurance, a more than 20% similarity in the text of a manuscript will be rejected. ETJ strictly follows the COPE charts in dealing with plagiarized articles.

Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism is not acceptable in Engineering and Technology Journal (ETJ) because plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics. Plagiarism includes copying text, tables, images, or data from another source, even from the author's own publications, without crediting the original source.

All manuscripts submitted to ETJ are checked for plagiarism using standard software iThenticate. This software checks content against a database of periodicals, the internet, and a comprehensive article database. It generates a similarity report, highlighting the percentage overlap between the submitted manuscript and the published document.

If the similarity seems legitimate, less than 20% from different sources, the manuscript will proceed with the review process. However, in cases of high plagiarism (i.e., more than 20%), the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the manuscript is retracted from the journal website after careful investigation and approval by the journal's Editor-in-Chief.

Engineering and Technology Journal severely follows the committee of publication ethics (COPE) guidelines to detect plagiarism; for more clear insight, authors may refer to flowcharts provided by COPE by clicking here or visiting the COPE website.

Revenue Sources

Engineering and Technology Journal (ETJ) is a self-financing journal and does not receive funding from any source except the staff salaries which are provided by the publisher (University of Technology-Iraq). The publication processing is solely dependent upon the Article Processing Charges (APC) received from authors. As the journal is Open Access so there are no subscription charges. The content is freely accessible for the readers on the journal website. The Journal does not accept advertising requests.

Copyright Policies and Malpractice Statement

Engineering and Technology Journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows users to copy, create extracts, abstracts, and new works from the article, alter and revise the article, and make commercial use of the article (including reuse and/or resale of the article by commercial entities), provided the user gives appropriate credit (with a link to the formal publication through the relevant DOI), provides a link to the license, indicates if changes were made. The licensor is not represented as endorsing the use made of the work. The authors hold the copyright for their published work on the ETJ website. At the same time, ETJ is responsible for appreciating citation for their work, released under CC-BY-4.0, enabling the unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction of an article in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

Creative Commons Attribution

Creative Commons Attribution permits others to distribute and copy the manuscript, create extracts, abstracts, and other revised versions, adaptations, or derivative works of or from the manuscript (such as a translation), to include in a collective work, to text or data mine the article, even commercially, as long as they credit the author(s), do not represent the author as endorsing their adaptation of the article, and do not modify the article in such a way as to damage the author's honor or reputation. Further details are found at Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)

Author Self-Archiving Policy

This policy sets out how the Engineering and Technology Journal (ETJ) authors can archive copies of their work on their own web pages, corporate web pages, and various other subject repositories.

ETJ is an open-access license. Therefore, articles can be made available immediately according to their specific Creative Common license terms. If an author has published an article under an Open Access license, ETJ would encourage the author to share the Version of Record on publication as opposed to the Accepted Manuscript.

Authors may also reuse the Abstract and Citation information (e.g., Title, Author name, Publication dates) of their article anywhere at any time including social media such as LinkedIn, Facebook, blogs and Twitter, providing that where possible a link is included back to the article on the ETJ site. Preferably the link should be, or include, the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) which can be found in the Citation information about the article online. In addition, the author may place the accepted version in the author personal website and/or the author company/institutional repository or archive. Self-archiving of the submitted version is not subject to an embargo period.

A summary is provided as follows:

Preprints

Authors can share their preprint anywhere at any time. If accepted for publication, we advise authors to link the preprint to their formal publication via its Digital Object Identifier (DOI).

Author Accepted Manuscripts

Authors are free to share (Author Accepted Manuscript) on any institutional or subject repository.

Published articles (Version of Record)

All authors and users are free to use, reproduce, or distribute the works published in ETJ in any way they prefer on the condition that the reproduced/redistributed material acknowledges that it was originally published in ETJ with all relevant publication details. When sharing works published originally in ETJ on other platforms, we advise using the final version made publicly available on ETJ website.

ETJ is now formally archived at the Iraqi Academic Scientific Journal (IASJ)

Crossmark Policy

Crossmark is an initiative to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content. By applying the Crossmark button, Engineering and Technology Journal is committing to maintaining the content it publishes, and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking on the Crossmark button will tell you the current status of a document, and may also give you additional publication record information about the document.

Correction and retraction of articles

Modifications to a published article can be implemented under the approval of the journal's editor. The extent of these modifications will be determined by the editors, with minor corrections being directly applied to the initial article. In instances of significant corrections, the original article will remain unaltered, and the rectified version will be separately published. A linkage between the original and corrected versions will be established. A statement elucidating the rationale behind substantial alterations to the article will accompany the publication. If deemed necessary, article retractions will adhere to the guidelines outlined by COPE retraction guidelines.

Further reading: COPE Guidelines COPE Flowcharts

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

Introduction

This policy addresses the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies within the publication processes of the Engineering and Technology Journal. It aims to offer clear guidance and ensure transparency for authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. These guidelines will be reviewed periodically to reflect technological advancements and ethical considerations.

Policy for Authors

Use of AI in Scientific Writing

This policy covers the use of AI tools during the manuscript preparation stage and not during data analysis or interpretation phases of the research.
Authors may use generative AI or AI-supported tools to enhance grammar, clarity, and language quality. However, such tools should be employed with human oversight, and authors must critically review and revise AI-generated content to correct any inaccuracies or biases.
The full responsibility for the content remains with the authors, regardless of the tools used.
Generative AI or similar technologies must not be credited as authors. Authorship is reserved for individuals who fulfill established authorship criteria, including accountability, contribution, and the ability to verify the integrity of the work.
Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the manuscript is original, does not infringe on third-party rights, and complies with the journal’s Ethical Guidelines.

Use of AI in Images, Figures, and Artwork

The use of generative AI or AI-enhanced tools to create, modify, or alter images, figures, or visual data is not permitted. This includes altering specific features, obscuring or enhancing elements, or generating visual components unrelated to original data.
Basic modifications such as adjusting brightness or contrast are allowed if they do not affect the integrity of the information presented.
An exception is made when AI-based tools are integral to the research methodology (e.g., AI in medical imaging). In such cases, usage must be thoroughly explained in the Methods section, including the tool’s name, version, and parameters.
Authors may be required to submit original and unedited image files for editorial verification.
The use of generative AI to produce graphical abstracts or cover images is not allowed unless prior written approval is obtained from the editorial board and all necessary rights are cleared.

Policy for Reviewers

Use of AI During Peer Review

Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as strictly confidential. Uploading any portion of a manuscript to AI tools for analysis or language editing is strictly prohibited, as this may breach privacy, confidentiality, and intellectual property rights.
The review report itself must not be processed using AI tools, even for linguistic refinement.
Peer review requires human expertise, judgment, and ethical responsibility. Generative AI tools lack the necessary critical reasoning and can produce misleading or biased assessments.
Reviewers are fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, and confidentiality of their evaluations.
The journal may use internally approved AI-assisted tools (e.g., for plagiarism detection or reviewer suggestions), all of which conform to data protection regulations and ensure confidentiality.

Policy for Editors

Editorial Use of AI

Editors must also treat all submitted content, reviewer reports, and correspondence as confidential and must not upload any part of it into public AI platforms.
Editorial assessments and decision letters should not be prepared or refined using generative AI tools, even for language improvement.
Editorial responsibilities—including manuscript evaluation, reviewer coordination, and communication of decisions—require human oversight and ethical discernment. These duties cannot be delegated to AI tools.
If editors identify potential misuse of AI by authors or reviewers, they should report it to the journal’s Editor-in-Chief (EIC).
The journal may use in-house or licensed AI technologies in screening, plagiarism checks, and editorial workflows, all in compliance with data privacy and ethical standards.

Engineering and Technology Journal encourages responsible and transparent use of generative AI tools in scientific communication. All stakeholders are expected to adhere strictly to these policies to maintain the integrity, trust, and quality of our publication process.