1. Editorial Policy
1) The Editorial Department is authorized to make technical and textual modifications to any accepted manuscript, and any modifications of the original meaning are subject to the author's consent. The author assumes full responsibility for the article.
2) After authors submit their manuscripts, we will review them for academic misconduct. The system will automatically generate a detection report according to the “WANFANG Similarity Detection” (powered by WANFANG Data Co., Ltd.). If the manuscript’s proportion of replication exceeds 15%, the editor of the journal may conclude that there is plagiarism.
2. Review system and process
1) Submission: All manuscripts must be submitted online through the website:
https://kjhkyx.journalx.cn/CN/home.
If you are unable to submit your manuscript normally, please contact the editorial office promptly at 010-66928309 and send your manuscript by E-mail: kjyxzz@163.com; After a submission is successful, the author will receive an email confirmation.
2) Receipt: The editor receives the manuscript, assigns a manuscript number to it, and sends the manuscript number information via email.
3) Initial Review: On submission, full-time editors review all submitted manuscripts initially for suitability for formal review. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious scientific or technical flaws, or lack of a significant message are rejected before proceeding for formal peer-review. Manuscripts that are unlikely to be of interest to the readers are also likely to be rejected at this stage.
4) External Review: Manuscripts that are found suitable for publication in the jJournal are sent to two or more expert reviewers. The reviewers should not be work in the same institute as the contributor(s). The selection of these reviewers is at the sole discretion of full-time editors. The Journal follows a double-blind review process, wherein the reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s identity. The comments and suggestions (acceptance/rejection/amendments in manuscripts) received from reviewers are conveyed to the corresponding author. If required, the author is requested to provide a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript. For controversial manuscripts where the authors and reviewers cannot reach consensus, the editorial office will select two or more related experts based on the manuscript’s research focus to conduct a re-review in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief.
5) Final Review: The Editor-in-Chief conducts the final review, re-evaluating the manuscript in terms of the innovativeness of the topic, academic quality, social impact, and timeliness, and issues a final decision (acceptance, revision and resubmission, or rejection) based on the external review comments. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on whether to accept the manuscript.
6) Editors: Edit, process, and publish accepted manuscripts. Those who wish to find out more about submission can inquire the Editorial Office by phone.
3. Review Period
If you have not received a notification regarding the status of your manuscript within three months of receiving this journal’s acknowledgment of receipt, your manuscript is still under review. If you wish to submit your manuscript to another journal, please contact this journal first; do not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals. If you have not received a decision on acceptance after six months, you may handle the manuscript as you see fit. For manuscripts returned for revision, authors should address each point raised by the reviewers and highlight the revised sections in the revised manuscript using a different color or underlining to facilitate the reviewers’ re-evaluation. If the revised manuscript is not returned to the Editorial Office one month afterf the deadline, it will be considered automatically withdrawn. Upon receipt of the revised manuscript, the Editorial Office will conduct a re-evaluation, and the Editor-in-Chief will organize a collective discussion to finalize the decision. If no acceptance decision is made within three months, the revised manuscript is deemed unacceptable, and authors may handle the manuscript as they see fit or contact the Editorial Office.
4. Manuscripts Submitted by Editorial Board Members
Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members must also comply with all of the journal’s review and editorial procedures. Editorial board members must not participate in the peer review, edition, or acceptance decisions regarding manuscripts authored by themselves, their family members, or their colleagues. Peer-review must be conducted independently of relevant authors, editors, and their research teams. If the Editor-in-Ehief is the author of a manuscript, the manuscript will be referred to an associate editor for handling. Furthermore, editorial board members and editors must avoid reviewing manuscripts by authors with whom they have a competitive, collaborative, or other conflict of interest.
5. Review of Manuscripts for Special Issues and Special Sections
The manuscript review process described above also applies to submissions for special issues and special sections. Manuscripts submitted for special issues and special sections will undergo the exact same review and editorial process as other manuscripts, and the Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision on acceptance after comprehensive consideration. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the entire content of the journal, including special issues and special sections. When working on special issues and columns, the Editorial Office will invite leading experts in the related fields to serve as guest editors, whose responsibilities include proposing themes for special issues, soliciting manuscripts, organizing peer review, and resolving any issues that arise during publication. The work of guest editors is subject to oversight by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Office to ensure the fairness of the manuscript review process.
6. Appeals
Authors who disagree with the editors’ review comments may file an appeal. Authors must submit a “Statement of Appeal,” specifying the manuscript number, to email kjyxzz@163.com. The statement must provide detailed grounds for the appeal, including a comprehensive and reasonable explanation of the review comments, and must be stamped by the author’s affiliated institution to be valid. The Editorial Board will determine whether to accept the appeal based on the specific circumstances.
7. Corrections and Retractions
1) General Policy: Articles published online or in print are considered final versions. This journal generally does not issue corrections or retract published articles. However, in cases where it is deemed necessary (as described below), corrections or retractions may be made.
2) Corrections: If an article contains unintentional scientific errors that do not significantly affect the results or conclusions, the Editorial Board will publish a correction notice in the journal as soon as possible, detailing the changes made to the original text and citing the article’s source. The journal will publish a corrected version of the paper, which will detail the changes made to the original article and indicate the update date. When citing the article, the latest version should be referenced.
3) Retraction: The Journal should consider retracting a publication if:
①Editors have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
②It constitutes plagiarism. Once plagiarism is confirmed, the article will be retracted, a retraction statement will be published, and a link to the retraction statement will be provided in the relevant databases alongside the original article.
