Peer Review Policy

Journal of Intelligent Geotechnical Engineering and Foundations follows a double-blind peer review process to promote fair, objective, and independent evaluation of submitted manuscripts. Under this model, the identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and reviewers are not identified to authors. Manuscripts are first assessed by the editorial team for relevance to the Journal’s scope, basic quality, originality, ethical compliance, and suitability for peer review. Manuscripts that meet these requirements are normally evaluated by independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.

Authors may suggest up to three potential reviewers who have relevant expertise and no conflict of interest with the submitted work. Authors may also request the exclusion of specific individuals where there is a legitimate concern about a potential conflict, competing interest, or other circumstance that could compromise impartiality. Such suggestions or exclusion requests should be accompanied by appropriate professional details and, where relevant, a brief explanation. Reviewer suggestions and exclusions are advisory only; the Editor retains full discretion over reviewer selection and is not required to use suggested reviewers or accept exclusion requests.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, confidentially, and solely on their scholarly and methodological merits. Editorial decisions are based on the overall assessment of the manuscript and the available reviewer reports. The Journal does not guarantee acceptance based on favourable reviews, and editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the appropriate editor.