Peer Review Process

Peer review is a cornerstone of our publication process, ensuring that MNK Publication upholds the highest quality standards for its published papers. All manuscripts submitted to our journals undergo a rigorous and thorough peer review by experts in the relevant field.

Double-Blind Review

We utilize a double-blind review process, meaning that both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process. This helps to ensure impartiality and fairness in the evaluation of manuscripts.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat the entire review process and any correspondence strictly confidential. They should not discuss the manuscript with anyone not involved in the review process without the editor's prior consent. Anonymity of the reviewers is crucial for an objective review, so we do not disclose the identities of the reviewers to the authors or other reviewers, unless a reviewer specifically requests us to do so.

Initial Submission and Pre-Checks

Upon submission, the Managing Editor conducts a technical pre-check to ensure the manuscript meets the basic requirements. Following this, a suitable academic editor is notified of the submission and invited to perform an editorial pre-check. This editor can choose to:

• Continue with the peer review process
• Reject the manuscript
• Request revisions before peer review

Peer Review

If the manuscript proceeds to peer review, the Editorial Office arranges for independent experts to review the manuscript. Typically, at least two review reports are collected for each manuscript. Authors may be asked to make sufficient revisions, and in some cases, a second round of peer review is conducted to ensure all concerns are addressed.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are asked to respond to the editor's initial contact within 24 hours and submit their review report within 15 days, unless otherwise agreed upon with the editor. While writing their reports, reviewers should aim to be critical but constructive and avoid offensive or discouraging language. Reviewers should consider the following points when evaluating a manuscript:

• Originality: Is the work original and novel? If not, why?
• Interest: Is the work of general or specialized interest?
• Research Question: Is the research question clearly defined and answered?
• Design: Is the study adequately designed to answer the research question?
• Abstract: Does it correctly summarize the study?
• Introduction: Does it provide an appropriate basis for the study?
• Methods: Are methodological details sufficient? Is any presented statistical analysis appropriate and sound? Are any additional statistical tests needed?
• Results: Are these logically presented and do they answer the research question?
• Discussion: Is the literature appropriately and fairly cited? Are the results clearly and justifiably discussed in the light of published literature?
• Conclusions: Are the claims and inferences drawn from the study justified and convincing, or do they need further evidence? Should the authors have drawn any additional conclusions from the presented data?
• References: Are they up to date and relevant? Has any relevant reference been omitted?
• Ethical Issues: Does the research raise any ethical concerns regarding the use of animal or human subjects?
• Overall Readability: Is the manuscript clearly and concisely written? If not, how could it be improved? Could it be shortened?

Final Decision

The final decision on the manuscript is made by an academic editor, who could be the Editor-in-Chief, an Editorial Board Member, or the Guest Editor of a Special Issue. Once a manuscript is accepted, it undergoes copy-editing and English-editing internally to ensure clarity and consistency.

Transparency and Quality Assurance

Our commitment to maintaining high-quality standards involves transparent and objective peer review practices. The double-blind review process further ensures impartiality and fairness. We strive to provide timely and constructive feedback to authors, enhancing the overall quality and integrity of the published research.

If you have any questions regarding our review policy, please contact us at support@mnkjournals.com.