Peer Review Process Description

The peer review process is an essential component of scholarly publishing, aimed at ensuring the quality, validity, and significance of research prior to its publication. Crimen is committed to a rigorous and transparent peer review process, which involves independent experts evaluating submitted manuscripts based on their originality, relevance, and scientific rigor. This process fosters academic integrity and helps maintain high standards in research. The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Step-by-Step Description of the Peer Review Process:

Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system.
Upon submission, the editorial office conducts a preliminary review to ensure that the manuscript adheres to the journal's submission guidelines and is within the scope of the journal.

Initial Editorial Review
The Editor-in-Chief or managing editor evaluates the manuscript for its originality, significance, and clarity.
If the manuscript meets the journal’s standards, it is deemed suitable for peer review. If not, it may be rejected without external review (desk rejection).

Reviewer Selection
The editor selects two qualified reviewers with expertise in the manuscript’s subject area. Reviewers are chosen based on their knowledge, experience, and lack of conflicts of interest.
The editorial team sends an invitation to potential reviewers, who must confirm their willingness to participate in the review process.

Peer Review Process
Reviewers are provided with specific guidelines outlining their responsibilities, including evaluating the manuscript's methodology, data analysis, and overall contribution to the field.
Reviewers are typically given 2 to 4 weeks to complete their evaluations. They provide constructive feedback, suggestions for improvement, and a recommendation for the manuscript (accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject).

Collation of Feedback
The editor collects all reviewer comments and recommendations. These insights are crucial for the decision-making process and are compiled for communication to the authors.

Editorial Decision
The editor evaluates the feedback and makes a decision regarding the manuscript:
- Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without any further changes.
- Minor Revisions: Authors are invited to make small adjustments and resubmit for final approval.
- Major Revisions: Authors must address significant concerns and resubmit the manuscript, which may undergo another round of peer review.
- Reject: The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication in the journal.

Communication with Authors
The editor communicates the decision and reviewer comments to the authors. This notification includes detailed feedback and guidance for any required revisions.
Authors have a set timeframe to respond to the feedback and make necessary revisions. If the author does not submit the revised version of the manuscript within six months, they will be notified that their work will be removed from the review process and the journal's archive. If the author decides to withdraw the manuscript and submit it for publication elsewhere, they are obligated to inform the journal's editorial board.

Revisions and Resubmission
Upon receiving requests for revisions, authors modify their manuscripts accordingly and submit a revised version, along with a response letter that details how they addressed each reviewer’s comments.
The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers or new reviewers for further evaluation, depending on the extent of the revisions.

Final Decision
After reviewing the resubmitted manuscript and the authors’ responses, the editor makes a final decision regarding publication.
Authors are notified of the final decision, and if accepted, the manuscript proceeds to the production stage.

Publication
Accepted manuscripts undergo formatting, copyediting, and typesetting. The authors are notified of the publication timeline and any further steps required from them.
Once published, articles are made available to the academic community and the public, contributing to the ongoing discourse in the field.

Post-Publication Considerations
Crimen maintains a commitment to ethical standards even after publication. Authors are encouraged to notify the journal of any errors or issues found post-publication, which may be addressed through corrections or retractions as necessary.

Conclusion
The peer review process at Crimen is designed to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity and quality. By engaging experts in the field, we ensure that published research is robust, credible, and contributes meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge.