Review Process

Peer Review Policies & Responsibilities
NCJK is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and supporting responsible research practices. The peer review process ensures the quality and integrity of published work and relies on trust and ethical conduct from all parties involved. Reviewers play a crucial role in evaluating manuscripts and are expected to follow the ethical principles outlined in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Type of Peer Review
NCJK uses a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. Authors are required to submit the title page containing full author information separately from the main manuscript according to the journal template.

Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on their expertise related to the manuscript topic. Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the final selection remains at the editor’s discretion. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers before a decision is made by the editor.

Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, methodological soundness, clarity of results and conclusions, proper citation of previous studies, compliance with ethical standards (including plagiarism), and the manuscript’s contribution to the field. Reviewers may also suggest improvements in language and writing style.

Peer Review Process
After receiving an invitation, reviewers confirm their availability through the journal system. They provide comments through the review form or by uploading a document. The reviewer’s recommendation may be: Accept Submission, Revisions Required (minor), Resubmit for Review (major), or Reject Submission.

Review Timeline
The initial editorial decision is usually provided within 4 weeks after submission. If the manuscript passes the initial evaluation, it will proceed to the peer review stage. The overall peer review process generally takes up to 16 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the number of revision rounds required. If reviewer opinions differ or delays occur, the editor may seek additional expert opinions.

Final Decision
The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on reviewers’ recommendations.