IJoC is committed to maintaining the highest standards of peer review and publication ethics, ensuring the integrity, fairness, and quality of the research it publishes. The journal employs a double-blind peer review process to maintain anonymity and impartiality, where both reviewers and authors remain unaware of each other's identities. This process is managed through an online platform (ACOMS Plus) that facilitates seamless and confidential communication.

1. Double-Blind Peer Review

IJoC employs a double-blind peer review system to ensure impartiality and confidentiality. This approach ensures that anonymity is preserved throughout the process, with all reviews managed via the online platform (ACOMS Plus).

2. Initial Assessment and Desk Rejection

Each manuscript undergoes a preliminary assessment to evaluate its suitability for the journal. During this stage, the submission is reviewed for alignment with the journal's scope to ensure it is relevant to IJoC’s focus areas. Manuscripts that do not meet this criterion may be rejected without external review. Furthermore, submissions are expected to adhere to high quality standards, demonstrating methodological rigor, clarity, and scientific significance. Ethical compliance is paramount, with all manuscripts screened for plagiarism and data integrity. Any ethical violations, such as plagiarism or data manipulation, lead to immediate rejection. Authors are promptly notified if their manuscript is desk rejected. In cases where a manuscript is rejected due to scope misalignment, authors may be invited to revise and resubmit accordingly.

3. Peer Review Process

Reviewer Selection and Invitation: The Editor-in-Chief assigns each manuscript to an appropriate Editor, who then selects reviewers based on their expertise and availability. Reviewers are invited through the platform and can access the manuscript and related documents online.
Evaluation and Decision Making: Based on the reviewer feedback and the Editor’s assessment, a manuscript may be accepted, requested to undergo minor or major revisions, or rejected. Minor revisions require small adjustments, which may not necessitate further review, whereas major revisions involve substantial changes and are limited to one round of resubmission.
Author Notification: Authors are notified of the decision through the platform and are provided with clear instructions for any required revisions. Revisions are expected to be submitted within two weeks via the online platform.

Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor and potentially the original reviewers evaluate the changes to make a final decision on acceptance or rejection. The final decision is communicated to authors through the online system.

4. Appeal Process

For authors wishing to appeal an editorial decision, IJoC offers an appeal process. Appeals must be initiated within 30 days of the decision notification by contacting the editorial office through the platform. Authors are required to submit a formal appeal letter detailing the reasons for the appeal and any additional data that may support their case. An independent reviewer or an editorial board member not previously involved in the manuscript’s evaluation will assess the appeal. The decision following the appeal process is final and binding, with the outcome communicated through the platform.

All manuscripts, including those submitted by editors, employees, or editorial board members, are processed with the same rigor as unsolicited submissions. Editors do not handle their own manuscripts, even if they are commissioned. Additionally, IJoC does not guarantee acceptance without review nor does it expedite peer review times for unsolicited manuscripts, ensuring fair and thorough evaluation for all submissions. Commissioned manuscripts, like all others, undergo full peer review before publication.