PEER REVIEW PROCESS
MESA (Mechanical, Electrical, Civil, and Architecture) Journal
Publication of articles in MESA Journal is determined solely by scientific validity, relevance to the scope, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field, as assessed by the editors and appointed peer reviewers. The journal highly values the dedication and scholarly feedback provided by its reviewers as part of the commitment to academic quality.
Initial Manuscript Evaluation
All submitted manuscripts will undergo an initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editorial board members within 2 weeks of submission. Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they:
- Are outside the journal's scope,
- Lack originality or scientific rigor,
- Contain major methodological flaws,
- Exhibit poor academic writing.
Only those manuscripts that pass this stage will proceed to the peer review process.
Peer Review Model
MESA Journal employs a double-blind peer review process, in which:
- The identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential,
- Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:
- Originality and novelty of the research
- Relevance and contribution to engineering or architectural knowledge
- Soundness of methodology and data analysis
- Clarity of results and discussion
- Proper referencing and academic ethics
Review Decision Outcomes
After the review, editorial decisions are made based on reviewers’ recommendations and may fall into one of the following categories:
- Accepted (with or without minor revisions)
- Revisions Required (major or minor)
- Rejected
Authors will be notified of the decision, along with anonymous reviewer comments, within an average of 4 to 8 weeks after peer review initiation.
Revision and Final Decision
Authors who are requested to revise their manuscripts must respond within the allocated time (usually 2–3 weeks). Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for re-evaluation. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection based on the complete review process.



