Peer Review Policy

Peer-review model, manuscript evaluation, editorial decisions, and confidentiality

Peer-Review Model

Jurnal Riset Kimia (JRK) uses double-anonymous peer review. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during review to the extent practicable.

Authors must prepare anonymized manuscript files for external review. Identifying information, including author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and document metadata, must be removed from files provided to reviewers. Author information is maintained separately in the journal's submission system.

Initial Editorial Screening

Every submission is first screened by an editor for relevance to the journal's aims and scope, completeness, originality, ethical declarations, and compliance with the Author Guidelines.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or declined without external peer review. Passing the initial screening does not guarantee acceptance for publication.

Reviewer Selection and Evaluation

Research articles and communications considered suitable for review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Review articles, considered at the invitation or request of the Editorial Board, are also subject to editorial assessment and external peer review when sent for review.

The editor may invite additional reviewers or obtain specialist advice when reviewer reports conflict, a particular method requires further assessment, or additional expertise is necessary.

Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the journal retains full responsibility for reviewer selection. Suggested reviewers may be declined when their independence, qualifications, or relevant expertise cannot be established.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must provide independent, constructive, evidence-based assessments of the manuscripts assigned to them. Reviews should consider scientific relevance, methodological validity, adequacy of supporting evidence, clarity of reporting, and the contribution of the research to the field.

Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation and decline assignments when impartial evaluation cannot be assured.

Manuscripts and associated materials must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished material for personal or professional advantage. Reviews must be respectful, objective, and free from inappropriate personal criticism.

Editorial Assessment and Decisions

Following peer review, the handling editor evaluates the reviewer reports, considers the manuscript's scientific merits and compliance with journal policies, and makes an editorial recommendation.

The Editor-in-Chief or a delegated editor makes the final editorial decision. Possible decisions include acceptance, a request for revision, or rejection.

Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the editorial decision. Editors may request clarification, additional assessment, or further revision when necessary.

Revised manuscripts may undergo further review depending on the extent of the changes required. Acceptance is based on the manuscript's scientific quality, reliability, ethical compliance, and suitability for publication in JRK.

Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest

An editor who is an author of a submitted manuscript, has a relevant conflict of interest, or is otherwise unable to act impartially must not handle the submission. An independent editor will be assigned to oversee the review and decision-making process.

Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members are subject to the same scientific, ethical, and peer-review standards as other submissions.

Special-issue submissions are subject to the journal's established editorial and peer-review standards. Guest editors must disclose conflicts of interest and may not make final decisions on their own submissions or manuscripts involving a conflict.

Confidentiality of Review Reports

Reviewer reports are confidential and are not published as part of the article's public record. Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors unless the journal obtains the reviewer's explicit consent and informs the author(s).

Editorial correspondence, reviewer reports, and unpublished manuscript materials are handled confidentially, subject to applicable ethical and legal obligations. Relevant reviewer comments may be shared with authors without disclosing reviewer identities.

Review Duration and Communication

JRK does not guarantee a fixed peer-review duration. Processing time depends on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, the number of review rounds required, and the time needed for editorial assessment.

Authors may contact the editorial office to request information about the status of their submission. Delays in the review process do not reduce the journal's scientific assessment or editorial standards.

Related Policies and Contact

Authors, reviewers, and readers may consult the following pages for further information:

• Author Guidelines and Submissions
• Complaints and Appeals
• Editorial Responsibilities and Governance
• Special Issues and Guest-Edited Content

For submission-related inquiries, visit the JRK Contact Page .