Reviewer Guidelines

Journal of Kryon

Peer review is a critical component of scholarly communication and ensures the integrity, accuracy, and scientific contribution of published research. Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining high academic standards, enhancing manuscript quality, and supporting authors with constructive and unbiased feedback.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

Provide a fair, objective, and timely assessment of the manuscript.

Evaluate the originality, relevance, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution.

Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process.

Disclose any conflict of interest before beginning the review.

Avoid using or sharing any unpublished content for personal research or benefit.

Review Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the following key aspects:
 

A. Originality and Contribution

Does the manuscript offer new insights, approaches, or findings?

Is the research problem clearly defined and significant to the field?

B. Relevance and Scope

Is the topic aligned with the scope and aims of the Journal of Kryon?

Does the manuscript address current or emerging areas of research?

C. Methodology and Rigor

Are research methods appropriate, clearly explained, and repeatable?

Are data sources reliable, sufficient, and accurately interpreted?

D. Clarity and Organization

Is the manuscript well-structured, logically presented, and easy to follow?

Are figures, tables, and visuals appropriate and necessary?

E. Ethical Compliance

Are ethical guidelines followed (human subjects, AI use, data privacy, citations)?

Is the manuscript free from plagiarism, duplicated content, or manipulated data?

F. References and Citation Quality

Are references recent, relevant, and properly formatted in the required style?
 

Timelines

To ensure efficient publication, reviews should be completed within:

10–14 days from the date of assignment.

If more time is required, reviewers must request an extension in advance.