Every submitted paper will be reviewed through a double-blind review process. Reviewers are unaware of the identity of Authors, and Authors are also unaware of the identity of the reviewers. The review process evaluates the manuscript based on its novelty, objective, methodology, scientific impact, conclusion, and references. JTIP does not guarantee manuscript acceptance or very short peer review process. Plagiarism screening is conducted using Turnitin. The final decision is made by Chief Editor. The following are the steps in the Peer Review Process in JTIP.

1. Submission of the manuscript: Manuscript must be prepared using the manuscript format (JTIP Article Template). Author(s) is required to submit an Authors Agreement declaration along with any other necessary supporting documents.
2. Pre-evaluation: Manuscript received by Technical Editor, will be checked for its compliance with the JTIP format standard. Manuscript not meeting the writing format standard will be returned to Author(s), while suitable manuscript will be forwarded to Chief Editor and Associate Editors. Chief Editor and Associate Editors evaluate the alignment of the manuscript's topic with the scope of JTIP, as well as assesses the manuscript's novelty, objective, method, and scientific impact. Unsuitable topics will be declined, while suitable ones will be sent to the reviewers.
3. Review by peer reviewers: The reviewers are assigned to conduct a thorough review of the manuscript over a period of two weeks, and the review results are to be forwarded to the Technical Editor. Reviewers must not be allowed to use artificial inteligence (AI) technologies in reviewing process to protect authors' rights and research confidentiality. Next, Chief Editor will assess the manuscript's status (Feasible/Minor/Major/Reject) based on the reviewers' evaluation. The decision made by Chief Editor, along with the reviewers' comments, will be conveyed to the Author.
4. Revision by Author(s): Author(s) is expected to revise the manuscript based on the reviewers' comments and submit the revised manuscript within two weeks after receiving the feedback from the Technical Editor.
5. Evaluation by Editors: Once the revised manuscript is resubmitted by Author(s), one of the Editors in food chemistry, food microbiology, food biochemistry, or food process engineering corresponding to the manuscript topic will review the revised manuscript. A decision will be made to determine if the revisions are appropriate; if not, the manuscript will be returned to Author(s). When the revisions are deemed satisfactory, the manuscript will be forwarded to Chief Editor.
6. Decision of the manuscript: Chief Editor determines the final status of the manuscript. Accepted manuscripts will be followed up by an acceptance letter from Technical Editor, which will be sent to Author(s).
7. Production of galley proof: The manuscript galley proof is produced by Production Editor. Production Editor will send the galley proof to Author(s) for review. Revised and corrected galley proof, if any, is then sent by Author(s) to Production Editor.
8. Final galley proof production and publication: Upon receiving the revised galley proof from Author(s) (if any), Production Editor will produce the final galley proof. At this stage, Production Editor will verify the metadata in OJS, including Author name(s), affiliation, abstract, keywords, and references, and upload the articles online. Production Editor will then publish the journal online, followed by an assign of DOI, and update metadata on Google Scholar and DOAJ.