Peer-Reviewed · Open Access · DOI-Registered

Loading…
KU8+ Journal Logo
Peer Review Process
Policy

Peer Review Process

Rigorous. Transparent. Impartial.

KU8+ employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process in which both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous to each other. This approach minimises bias and ensures that editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific merit and relevance of the work.

Review Workflow

1

Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts via the online portal. An initial completeness and formatting check is conducted by the editorial office within 2–3 business days.

2

Editorial Desk Review

The Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor reviews the submission for scope alignment, originality, and minimum quality standards before sending for peer review.

3

Double-Blind Peer Review

At least two independent expert reviewers evaluate the manuscript. Both author and reviewer identities are concealed throughout the process.

4

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer recommendations, the handling editor makes one of four decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

5

Revision & Re-review

Revised manuscripts are assessed against the reviewers' comments. A second round of review may be requested if major revisions were required.

6

Final Acceptance & Production

Accepted manuscripts are copy-edited, typeset, and assigned a DOI. Authors receive proofs for approval before final publication.

Timelines

StageTarget Timeframe
Initial editorial check2–3 business days
First review cycle3–6 weeks
Revision period (authors)Up to 4 weeks (minor) / 8 weeks (major)
Second review cycle (if needed)2–3 weeks
Final decision to publication2–4 weeks after acceptance

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively, providing constructive, evidence-based feedback.
  • Disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting a review invitation.
  • Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscript content and the review process.
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe, notifying the editorial office promptly of any delays.
  • Refrain from using unpublished information from manuscripts for personal advantage.