Peer review Process
KRJEL uses double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know who the authors are, and authors do not know who the reviewers are.
- The manuscript arrives through the submission system or by email and is logged with its submission date.
- Initial check (within 7 working days).The editorial office checks scope, completeness, formatting, anonymisation and ethics statements, and runs the plagiarism check. Manuscripts that fail may be returned for correction or rejected without review.
- Handling editor.The Editor-in-Chief assigns an editor with expertise in the subject who has no conflict of interest.
- Peer review.The handling editor invites at least two independent reviewers with no conflict of interest, from institutions different from the authors'.
- Reviewer assessment.Reviewers judge originality, relevance to scope, soundness of methods, validity of results and conclusions, use of literature, ethics, and clarity of writing.
- Based on the reviews, the handling editor recommends one of: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision or Reject. The Editor-in-Chief confirms the final decision.
- Authors revise and reply to each reviewer comment, normally within 4 weeks for major and 2 weeks for minor revisions. Major revisions return to the reviewers; minor revisions may be checked by the handling editor.
- Acceptance and production.Accepted papers are copyedited, typeset, proofread by the authors, assigned a DOI and published online.
Typical timeline
|
Stage |
Time |
|
Initial check |
Up to 7 working days |
|
Peer review to first decision |
4–8 weeks |
|
Decision after revision |
2–3 weeks |
|
Acceptance to online publication |
[2–4] weeks |
Appeals. Authors may appeal a decision once, in writing, to the Editor-in-Chief. See Corrections, Retractions & Appeals.