Review Process Policy

JP2KG AUD applies a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of all manuscripts submitted for publication. The journal is committed to maintaining a fair, transparent, confidential, and impartial review process.

  1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first screened by the editorial team to assess their suitability for the journal. The initial screening considers the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, compliance with the author guidelines, basic academic quality, originality, and adherence to publication ethics.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected without external peer review. The editorial team may also request revisions to address formatting or submission requirements before proceeding to the next stage.

  1. Plagiarism and Publication Ethics Screening

Submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism detection software and other appropriate methods to identify potential plagiarism, redundant publication, inappropriate citation practices, or other ethical concerns.

Manuscripts suspected of violating publication ethics may be returned to the authors for clarification, rejected, or handled in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies, depending on the nature and severity of the concern.

  1. Peer-Review Method

JP2KG AUD uses a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another as far as reasonably possible.

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts and supplementary files do not contain information that unnecessarily reveals their identities. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality and disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.

Although the journal takes reasonable steps to preserve anonymity, complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed in every case.

  1. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area and methodology of the submission.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, professional competence, and ability to provide an objective assessment. Reviewers must not have conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality.

The journal generally seeks evaluations from at least two independent reviewers for each manuscript. However, the editorial team may determine an appropriate review arrangement based on the manuscript's subject, availability of qualified reviewers, and editorial needs.

  1. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts according to criteria relevant to the type of submission, including:

  • Relevance to the focus and scope of JP2KG AUD.
  • Originality and contribution to knowledge or practice in early childhood education.
  • Clarity and significance of the research problem or central argument.
  • Appropriateness of the theoretical framework and use of relevant literature.
  • Suitability and rigor of the research design, methodology, and data analysis, where applicable.
  • Accuracy, clarity, and adequacy of the interpretation of findings or arguments.
  • Relevance of the discussion, conclusions, and implications.
  • Quality of academic writing, organization, and presentation.
  • Adequacy and accuracy of citations and references.
  • Compliance with research ethics and applicable publication standards.

Reviewers should provide constructive, evidence-based comments that help the authors improve their manuscripts. Personal criticism, discriminatory language, and unsupported judgments are not acceptable.

  1. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers' reports and the editor's independent assessment, the editorial team may make one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without further substantive revision.
  2. Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited revisions before a final decision can be made.
  3. Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and may be subject to further review.
  4. Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's requirements for publication.

A recommendation from a reviewer does not automatically determine the final decision. The editor retains responsibility for making the editorial decision, taking into account the quality of the manuscript, the reviewers' comments, the journal's standards, and relevant ethical considerations.

If reviewers provide conflicting recommendations, the editor may seek an additional independent review or make a decision based on the available evidence.

  1. Revision and Resubmission

Authors whose manuscripts require revision must submit a revised version within the deadline specified by the editorial team. Authors should provide a point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. If an author does not agree with a recommendation, the response should provide a clear academic justification.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the extent of the revisions and the nature of the comments. Failure to submit revisions within the specified period without an approved extension may result in the manuscript being closed or treated as withdrawn.

  1. Review Timeline

JP2KG AUD aims to process manuscripts as efficiently as possible while maintaining the quality and integrity of peer review. The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, the number of revision rounds, and the time required for authors to respond.

Authors will be informed of significant developments and editorial decisions through the journal's submission system or official communication channels.

  1. Confidentiality and Reviewer Conduct

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, distribute, use, or disclose unpublished manuscript content for personal, professional, or research purposes without appropriate authorization.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly regarding a manuscript under review unless explicitly authorized by the editorial team. Any concerns about research integrity, ethical compliance, or potential misconduct should be reported confidentially to the editor.

The editorial team is responsible for protecting the confidentiality of submissions, review reports, and editorial deliberations.

  1. Conflicts of Interest and Impartiality

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their judgment. Individuals with conflicts that may compromise impartiality must withdraw from the relevant editorial or review process.

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, relevance, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and the journal's publication standards. Decisions must not be influenced by authors' personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political views, or ability to pay publication fees.

  1. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal if they believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant factual error, a demonstrable procedural irregularity, or an apparent failure to consider relevant scholarly evidence.

Appeals must be submitted in writing to the editorial team and must clearly explain the grounds for reconsideration. The editor-in-chief or an independent editor designated by the journal will assess the appeal. The journal may consult additional experts when necessary.

An appeal does not guarantee a change in the original decision. The journal's appeal process is intended to ensure that decisions are made fairly and in accordance with editorial standards.

  1. Final Editorial Authority

The editor-in-chief retains final responsibility for editorial decisions and the integrity of the peer-review process. All manuscripts are assessed according to consistent editorial standards, regardless of the authors' institutional affiliations or other non-academic characteristics.

By submitting a manuscript to JP2KG AUD, authors acknowledge that their submissions are subject to the journal's editorial screening, peer-review procedures, and publication ethics policies.