The process of reviewing and criticizing writings

the journal JSKP relies on the peer review process to support the quality of the articles it publishes.
Despite numerous criticisms about the integrity of peer review, the majority of the research community still believes that peer review is the best form of scientific evaluation.

the journal used Double anonymized review
Both the reviewer and the author are anonymous in this model. Some advantages of this model are listed below.
Author anonymity limits reviewer bias, for example based on an author's gender, country of origin, academic status or previous publication history.
Articles written by prestigious or renowned authors are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than their reputation.
But bear in mind that despite the above, reviewers can often identify the author through their writing style, subject matter or self-citation – it is exceedingly difficult to guarantee total author anonymity. More information for authors can be found in our double-anonymized peer review guidelines.

Please therefore ensure that the following items are present in your submission and are provided as separate files:
1. Title page

The title page will remain separate from the manuscript throughout the peer review process and will not be sent to the reviewers. It should include:

The manuscript title

All authors' names and affiliations

A complete address for the corresponding author, including an e-mail address

Acknowledgements

Conflict of interest statement

2. Anonymised manuscript

Please remove any identifying information, such as authors' names or affiliations, from your manuscript before submission.

Along with removing names and affiliations under the title within the manuscript, other steps need to be taken to ensure the manuscript is correctly prepared for double anonymized peer review. The key points are:

Make sure that figures and tables do not contain any reference to author affiliations.

Exclude acknowledgements and any references to funding sources. Use the title page, which is not sent to reviewers, to detail these and to declare any potential conflicts of interest to the editor.

Choose file names with care, and ensure that the file’s “properties” are also anonymised. If you are using Microsoft Office 2007 or later, consider using the Document Inspector Tool prior to submission.

Take care to ensure that you do not inadvertently upload identifying information within any of the files that will be shared with reviewers. All file types except title page, cover letter and LaTeX source files are typically included in the version of your manuscript shared with reviewers.

The peer review process is in the Journal of Science and Knowledge Horizons. In general, the research is arbitrated by experts in the same field of study (specialization), who are carefully selected by the scientific committee of the journal. The main steps of the arbitration process are as follows: Research Submission: The research is submitted by the researcher to the scientific journal via its website asjp , and the research is submitted according to the terms of the journal and in accordance with the instructions of the journal. Initial Review: The research is evaluated by the scientific committee of the journal to ensure that it conforms to the journal's standards and that it can be published. All types of conflicts of interest must be declared by all the members of jkp editorial board before accepting to be part of the Review Process
Some papers are rejected at this stage if they do not meet the required criteria. Distribution of research to experts: After the initial review, the research is distributed to reviewers (experts in the same field of research) who will evaluate it. The research is usually distributed to at least two experts.
External Arbitration: The research is evaluated by external reviewers to verify its validity, quality, and relevance to the specific field of publication. External reviewers can provide comments and feedback on the research, analysis, evaluation, and opinion. The research is evaluated on several criteria, such as the methodology used, statistical analysis, the validity of the conclusions, the extent to which evidence supporting the research is presented, and other scientific criteria related to the field of research.
Internal arbitration: After receiving the reports of the external reviewers, the research is evaluated by the scientific committee of the journal, and the final decision is made regarding its acceptance or rejection. The Scientific Committee may request updates or modifications to the research before it is accepted for publication. Notification of the decision: The researcher is informed of the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the research, or the request for updates or amendments. If the research is accepted, the researcher will be informed of the details of publishing the research in the journal  More information .

process is based on the following flow chart: