Review Policy

1. Peer Review System

The Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences (JIKK) applies a double-blind peer review system to ensure an objective, fair, and independent evaluation of submitted manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the peer review process.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area. The peer review process aims to assess the academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, and contribution of each manuscript to the field.

2. Principles of Peer Review

Manuscripts are evaluated based on their academic merit, scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance to the journal's focus and scope, clarity of presentation, and potential contribution to the advancement of knowledge.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based assessments. Personal, institutional, or other irrelevant considerations must not influence the evaluation of a manuscript. The editorial team applies the journal's review criteria and procedures consistently and ensures that editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's academic merit, taking into account the reviewers' recommendations.

Further information on the stages of review, reviewer selection, review timelines, and editorial decisions is available in the journal's Peer-Review Process.

3. Responsibilities and Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and all information obtained during the review process as confidential. Manuscripts must not be shared with unauthorized parties or used for personal advantage. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest and decline an assignment if they cannot provide an impartial assessment.

The editorial team is responsible for managing the peer review process fairly and consistently, protecting the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, and ensuring that editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's academic merit and the reviewers' assessments.

Detailed ethical responsibilities and publication ethics requirements are provided in the journal's Ethics in Publishing.

4. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Reviewers are prohibited from using artificial intelligence (AI) tools to analyze or evaluate manuscripts, generate or draft review comments, or enter or upload submitted manuscripts or any part thereof into AI applications. All reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations independently and maintain the confidentiality of the materials entrusted to them.

Further information is available in the journal's AI Policy.

5. Editorial Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for making the final editorial decision after considering the reviewers' recommendations and the manuscript's overall academic quality, relevance, and compliance with the journal's requirements. Reviewers' recommendations inform the editorial decision but do not automatically determine the outcome.

Editorial decisions may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, resubmission for further review, or rejection. The journal may return revised manuscripts to reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.