Publication Process

Manuscripts submitted to Komunikarya undergo a rigorous double-anonymous peer-review process. This signifies that neither authors nor reviewers are cognizant of one another's identities. Editors retain the identities of both parties but abstain from revealing this information.

The following outlines the principal phases of the review process:

  1. Pre-Review

Upon receiving a manuscript, a chief editor is appointed to manage all aspects of the process. In the pre-review phase, the editor assesses the manuscript:

  • is suitable and aligned with the aims and parameters of Komunikarya;

  • is fully anonymized, free from any indications of authors’ identities, affiliations, or other identifiable details, and files are devoid of identifying metadata;

  • adheres to the journal’s word count limitations;

  • generally aligns with the journal’s stylistic standards.

The editor validates the conflict of interest declaration and affirms the incorporation of protocols for research involving human subjects.

The primary editor may now advance to the review phase, return the manuscript to the author(s) for minor amendments, or, in some instances, issue a desk rejection. A desk-reject indicates that the manuscript is currently unpublishable due to significant issues with structure, clarity, or logic, that it is aimed at an unsuitable audience, or that it is poorly situated within the existing literature. All manuscripts subject to potential desk rejection are assessed by many editors, who must reach a consensus prior to rendering this decision.

  1. Review

After a successful pre-review, the primary editor appoints a minimum of three peer reviewers who have demonstrated interest and has expertise in the pertinent subject area and/or research technique. Reviewers are provided with a set of evaluation criteria and a template to facilitate their assessments. They must formulate a preliminary conclusion using the four decision alternatives: Accept; Minor Revisions; Major Revisions; Reject.

  • Accept denotes a fully refined and structured manuscript suitable for publication in its present state following final copyediting.

  • Minor alterations indicate a strong manuscript that needs slight modifications in structure, clarity, reasoning, or other components; this suggestion typically does not require re-assessment, although exceptions may arise.

  • Major Revisions, or Revise and Resubmit, indicates that a manuscript requires significant modifications in structure, clarity, reasoning, or other components; this advice triggers automatic re-assessment. We request that earlier-round reviewers reevaluate manuscripts following authors' revisions, as they possess greater expertise in determining whether the authors have sufficiently addressed initial concerns.

  • A rejection indicates that a manuscript is currently unsuitable for publication due to shortcomings in organization, clarity, reasoning, or other factors, misalignment with the target audience, or insufficient contextualization within the existing literature. A consensus is attained by several editors following the evaluation of rejected manuscripts before the final decision.

  1. Initial Decision

The main editor reviews all comments and preliminary recommendations from peer reviewers, considers these observations in conjunction with their own study of the article, and issues an initial decision using the four previously described options. When assessments lack sufficient detail or contain contradictions, the chief editor may seek more reviewers or request other editing team members to assess the article. The decision, together with the reviewers' comments, is conveyed to the writers.

  1. Re-Review (obligatory for Major Revisions)

When writers revise and resubmit manuscripts requiring substantial modifications, the manuscript, together with the authors' cover letter detailing the changes, is forwarded to the original reviewers whenever possible. In specific cases, the editor may solicit additional reviewers. Reviewers assess if the authors' amendments, instigated by initial critiques, sufficiently improve the manuscript to warrant publication. The editor restates criticism to authors and renders a decision on publication.

  1. Final Decision

After one round of editing and resubmission, the chief editor often makes a definitive publication decision. The outcome will be Accept, Accept with Minor Revisions, or Reject. None of these decisions require re-review.

  1. Copyediting

Accepted manuscripts are subject to copyediting, obtain author approval, and subsequently are published in Komunikarya.