Peer Review and Editorial Procedure

General

KJN is dedicated to publishing high-quality research papers that meet the highest standards of academic excellence. To achieve this, we have established a rigorous peer review process that subjects every manuscript submitted to our journal to a thorough and critical evaluation by experts in the field. This process helps us maintain the integrity and credibility of our publications and ensures that the research we publish is accurate, relevant, and of the highest quality.

Initial Review Process

Upon receipt of a manuscript submission, our editorial team conducts a thorough initial review to ensure that the submission meets our journal's requirements and standards. The journal's Managing Editor conducts a technical pre-check of the manuscript to ensure that it meets the journal's formatting and content requirements. Following this, the Associate or Assistant Academic Editors are notified of the submission and invited to perform an editorial pre-check, which involves a careful review of the manuscript to assess its suitability for publication. In this stage, our Associate or Assistant Academic Editors evaluate the manuscript based on the following key criteria:

• Alignment with our journal's scope and focus
• Originality and relevance of the research
• Quality and coherence of the writing
• Adherence to our manuscript preparation guidelines

Based on their evaluation, Academic Editors can decide to continue with the peer review process, reject the manuscript, request revisions before proceeding with peer review, or directly accept the manuscript.

Peer Review Process

If the manuscript proceeds to peer review, the Editorial Office will organize a rigorous and confidential review process, inviting at least two independent experts in the relevant field to critically evaluate the manuscript. These reviewers will assess the manuscript's scientific merit, originality, and overall quality, providing constructive feedback to help strengthen the manuscript.

During the peer review process, reviewers will consider factors such as:

• The significance and originality of the research
• The validity and reliability of the methodology and data
• The clarity and coherence of the writing
• The relevance and impact of the research on the field

The peer reviewers provide detailed and constructive feedback to the authors, highlighting the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses. Authors are then required to address the reviewers' comments and make sufficient revisions to the manuscript.

The revised manuscript may undergo a second round of peer review to ensure that the authors have adequately addressed the reviewers' comments and that the manuscript meets our journal's standards.

After the peer review process is complete, the Editorial Office makes a final decision on the manuscript. This decision may be to accept, major or minor revisions, or reject the manuscript. Our peer review process is designed to be rigorous and transparent, ensuring that our published research meets the highest standards of quality and integrity.

Final Decision and Editing

The final decision on a manuscript's publication is made by an Academic Editor, typically the Editor-in-Chief or an Editorial Board Member of the journal. This decision is based on the peer review process, the manuscript's overall quality, and its relevance to the journal's scope and focus.

Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, it undergoes a thorough internal editing process to ensure that it meets our journal's high standards. This process includes copy-editing, English editing, formatting and layout. Following the editing process, the manuscript is prepared for production and publication. A final, proof-read manuscript is then sent to the authors for review and approval. Our editorial team is dedicated to ensuring that the final manuscript is of exceptional quality and meets our journal's rigorous standards.