Peer Review Policy

Overview:

The Kashf Journal of Linguistics (KJL) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing and academic rigor. Peer review is an essential component of this commitment, ensuring the quality, integrity, and credibility of the research published in our journal.

Types of Peer Review:

KJL employs a double-blind peer review process, where both the identities of the authors and the reviewers are concealed. This approach aims to eliminate bias and ensure a fair evaluation of the manuscript based solely on its merit.

Selection of Reviewers:

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic qualifications, and experience in the field of linguistics relevant to the submitted manuscript. The editorial board is responsible for identifying and inviting qualified reviewers, and authors are welcome to suggest potential reviewers during the submission process.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive feedback to authors. Key aspects for review include the originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and overall contribution of the research. Reviewers are also encouraged to identify any ethical concerns related to the content.

Confidentiality:

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the review process. The content of the manuscript, as well as any correspondence with the editorial team, should not be disclosed to anyone without explicit permission from the editorial office.

Timeliness:

Reviewers are requested to provide their assessments within the specified timeframe. If unable to meet the deadline, reviewers should promptly inform the editorial office to ensure a smooth and timely review process.

Editorial Decision:

The editorial decision is based on the reviewers' recommendations, but the final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief. Authors will be notified of the decision, along with the reviewers' comments, to help them improve the quality of their work.

Appeals:

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions. Appeals should be made in writing to the editorial office, providing a detailed rationale for reconsideration.

Conflicts of Interest:

Reviewers are expected to declare any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise their ability to provide an unbiased review. The editorial team will assess such declarations and may assign alternative reviewers if necessary.

Continuous Improvement:

KJL is committed to continuously improving its peer review process. Feedback from authors and reviewers is actively sought to identify areas for enhancement and to maintain the highest standards of scholarly publishing.