Commitment to ethical and rigorous publishing

Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal scope. All submissions undergo initial screening for ethics, originality, and reporting quality before peer review.

We support a constructive, timely review process that provides actionable guidance for authors and maintains respect for reviewers and editors.

Transparent and constructive evaluation

JCSR uses a structured review workflow that emphasizes methodological clarity, ethical compliance, and reproducibility. Editors assign submissions to qualified reviewers and evaluate reports for consistency and relevance. Authors receive consolidated feedback and clear decisions.

We aim for timely decisions while prioritizing review quality. Delays are communicated transparently, and authors are encouraged to respond to reviewer comments thoroughly and respectfully.

Transparent resolution pathways

Authors may appeal decisions by providing a detailed response to reviewer comments. Appeals are evaluated by senior editors who may request additional review. Decisions after appeal are final and communicated clearly.

Complaints regarding review conduct, conflicts, or ethics are handled confidentially and in alignment with recognized publishing standards.

Transparency in tool usage

Use of AI tools must be disclosed if they contributed to writing, analysis, or figure generation. Authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, and ethical compliance. AI tools must not replace human authorship or obscure data provenance.

Editors and reviewers evaluate AI assisted content using the same scientific standards as all submissions.

Ethical safeguards

Human subject research must include ethics committee approval and informed consent. Studies involving sensitive populations should demonstrate appropriate safeguards, data privacy measures, and compliance with regulations.

Maintaining accuracy

Corrections are issued for honest errors that affect interpretation or clarity. The journal works with authors to document changes transparently and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Protect unpublished work

Peer review is confidential. Editors and reviewers must not share manuscript content or use unpublished data for personal benefit. Breaches of confidentiality may result in reviewer removal and editorial action.

Structured and confidential review

JCSR uses editorial screening followed by expert peer review. Reviews are confidential, and reviewer identities are protected to promote objective evaluation. Editors ensure consistency across disciplines and manage conflicts of interest.

Fair and documented resolution

Concerns about review conduct or editorial decisions may be submitted to the editorial office. Each complaint is reviewed fairly, with documentation retained to ensure accountability and consistent outcomes.

Independent assessment

Editors evaluate appeals objectively and may request additional expert input if new evidence or clarifications are provided by the authors.

Consistent editorial standards

Policies are applied uniformly across disciplines to ensure fair decisions and trustworthy publication outcomes.

Support transparency

Editors document decision rationales to ensure accountability and support consistent outcomes across diverse subject areas.

Apply standards uniformly

Consistent policy application builds trust with authors and readers while supporting high quality publishing.

Staying current

Policy updates are communicated to editors and authors so standards remain consistent across submissions.

Guidance available

The editorial office can advise on complex ethics questions before and during review.