Peer Review Process

Review Model

All research content published in Jandoo Press journals is subject to rigorous double-anonymous peer review, in which neither the identities of the authors nor the reviewers are disclosed to the other party. This model is applied consistently to all primary research articles. Review type and status are clearly indicated on all published articles.

Process Overview

• Submission and initial screening: Every manuscript is assessed by the editorial office for fit with the journal's scope, compliance with submission guidelines, and basic quality standards prior to peer review.
• External review: Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to at least two qualified external reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise.
• Reviewer selection criteria: Reviewers are selected on the basis of expertise, absence of conflict of interest, and willingness to provide a timely and objective review.
• Reviewer recommendations: Reviewers may recommend Accept, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject. Recommendations are advisory; the final editorial decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.
• Author response: Authors whose manuscripts require revision must provide a point-by-point response to all reviewer comments.
• Re-review: Substantially revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers and/or additional reviewers.

Integrity Safeguards

• No manuscript submitted by an editor, editorial board member, or reviewer is evaluated by the individual concerned. A recusal and independent handling policy is in place.
• No promise of acceptance is made at any stage prior to the completion of peer review.
• Unrealistically short review timeframes are not advertised. The typical review duration is 4–6 weeks, subject to manuscript complexity and reviewer availability.

Last updated: 27 April 2026