| QUICK MENU |
| About the Journal |
| Focus and Scope |
| Publication Ethics |
| Guides for Author |
| Kronik Journal Team |
| Copyright Notice |
| Screening and Anti-Plagiarism |
| Author Fees |
Screening and Anti-Plagiarism
The Journal operates a peer review process and promotes blind reviewing. The acceptance or rejection of articles will be decided by the editorial boards based on the review results supplied by the reviewers. There are no communications between authors and editors concerning the rejection decision. Authors whose papers are rejected will be informed of the reasons of the rejection.
Articles to be published will undergo a two-stage review process, the first is the Editor's Review and a double-blind review submitted to the reviewer. The author's identity will not be known to reviewers and vice versa. Reviewers will consider the feasibility of the article in terms of the appropriateness of the title, abstract, introduction, discussion, and conclusion. Reviewers also assess the originality, significance of the article and the quality of the references. The following are the stages of the review process,
- Editor's Review: Manuscripts that have been received by the editor will go through an initial review process by the editor. The Editor will consider the following: 1) Suitability of Scope with KJHI; 2) Suitability of the Template; 3) Reference Quality; and 4) Plagiarism. The decision will be taken by the editor to "accept", reject, "and "accept with revision ".
- Author's Revision 1: The editor sends the decision of the manuscript to the author's review results. If the manuscript is "accepted with revision" then the author is required to make improvements in accordance with the advice of the editor. The author was given 2 weeks to complete the text revision. The revised manuscript was re-uploaded through the system.
- Double Blind Review: After going through the editor review process. then the manuscript that has been received is continued for review by two reviewers. Reviewers are tasked with reviewing the contents of the manuscript. The reviewer has the right to assess and recommend matters that need to be corrected in each part of the manuscript. The reviewer can recommend to "accept", reject "and" accept with revision "the reviewed manuscript. The decision to publish the reviewed article remains in the hands of the editorial board.
- Authors Revision 2: The editor sends the manuscript decision on the results of a double blind review to the author. If the manuscript is "accepted with revision," then the author is required to make improvements under the advice of the reviewer. The author is given 2-4 weeks to complete the revised manuscript. The revised manuscript was re-uploaded through the system.
- Publish: After the review process is complete, the articles that have been received will enter the editing and proofreading stages, to the layout settings.
Plagiarism Review Process
- Authors should submit the similarity report for their manuscript.
- Manuscripts with more than 10% similarity rate overall and more than 5% similarity rate with one source are not taken into the preliminary evaluation stage.
- Manuscripts with a similarity rate of 10% or less are checked based on the APA 7th edition referencing style.
Ethics Committee Approval
- All manuscripts that use data collected from human participants should submit the ethics committee approval form. These include research studies that require data collection utilizing scale, questionnaire, interview, or observation.
- The researchers should acknowledge that ethical principles are taken into consideration during the data collection and analysis processes, such as obtaining the volunteer informed / consent form in the articles.
