Overview of the Peer Review Process

Peer review is an essential component of the academic publishing process, ensuring the highest quality standards for manuscripts submitted to JOR. All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process. The detailed steps are as follows:

Technical Pre-screening

Upon submission, the Managing Editor conducts a technical pre-screening to ensure the manuscript meets the journal’s basic requirements (e.g., formatting, word count, scope). Editorial Pre-review

• After passing the technical pre-screening, the manuscript is assigned to an appropriate Academic Editor for an editorial pre-review. The Academic Editor evaluates the manuscript’s academic value, originality, and suitability for the journal, and decides whether it proceeds to peer review. The editor may choose one of the following actions:Proceed to peer review;

• Reject directly;

• Request revisions from the author(s) before initiating peer review.

Peer Review

If the manuscript advances to peer review, the Editorial Office invites at least two independent experts to evaluate it. Reviewers submit detailed reports assessing the academic quality, methodological rigor, data reliability, and originality of the work. Author Revisions and Secondary Review

Based on the reviewers’ comments, the author(s) are required to thoroughly revise the manuscript. If necessary, a second round of review may be conducted to ensure the revisions meet the required standards. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the Academic Editor (typically the Editor-in-Chief, an Editorial Board member, or a Guest Editor for special issues). The manuscript may be accepted, require further revisions, or be rejected. Editing and Proofreading

Accepted manuscripts undergo in-house editing and English language polishing to ensure linguistic and formatting consistency.

2. Reviewer Qualifications and Responsibilities

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the integrity and quality of the academic record. JOR expects reviewers to meet the following criteria:

Qualifications

• No conflict of interest with the author(s);

• Not affiliated with the same institution as the author(s);

• Have not co-authored publications with the author(s) within the past three years;

• Hold a Ph.D. or equivalent degree;

• Possess extensive research experience and a strong publication record in the relevant field (verifiable via Scopus or ORCID);

• Hold an officially recognized academic position.

Responsibilities

• Possess the expertise to evaluate the scientific quality of the manuscript;

• Provide high-quality review reports and respond promptly throughout the review process;

• Adhere to ethical and academic standards, following COPE guidelines (Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers | COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics).

Evaluation Criteria

• Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript based on the following aspects:Academic originality;

• Rigor of research methods and design;

• Accuracy and reliability of data;

• Logical coherence and support for conclusions;

• Clarity of language and structure.

Importance of Reviewers

Reviewers not only ensure the academic quality of manuscripts but also contribute to the overall health and advancement of the scholarly community. Through rigorous peer review, JOR is committed to publishing high-quality, high-impact research that drives academic progress.

Support and Resources for Reviewers

JOR provides the following support to reviewers:

• Detailed review guidelines and training resources;

• Reviewer certificates and recognition;

• Priority opportunities to participate in journal events.