Editorial Process
Rigorous, Transparent, and Inclusive
Chun Cheng Publisher Sdn. Bhd. (CCP) operates a transparent and rigorous editorial process led by active researchers and scholars. Our goal is to ensure that peer review is efficient, fair, and focused on improving the quality and clarity of every article. Each journal is managed by an independent editorial board under the guidance of an Editor-in-Chief, who oversees academic standards, reviewer selection, and acceptance decisions.
A simplified overview of the editorial process is described below.
Pre-Check
Every submission undergoes a preliminary assessment before peer review.
This stage includes:
- A technical check by the editorial office to confirm that the manuscript fits the journal scope, follows ethical and formatting standards, and passes a similarity screening.
- An editorial check by the assigned editor to confirm scientific soundness, relevance, and research quality.
Editors may recommend minor corrections before review, invite peer review directly, or decline submissions that do not meet the journal’s standards.
All checks are handled objectively and confidentially.
Peer Review
Once a manuscript passes the pre-check, it is sent for double-blind peer review (both authors and reviewers remain anonymous). At least two external-independent reviewers with expertise in the subject area evaluate the submission. They assess originality, validity of methods, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.
Authors may suggest reviewers or request exclusions, and editors ensure that all reviewers are free from conflicts of interest. Reviewers are normally given two weeks to complete their reports.
Open Communication and Transparency
CCP's journals encourage constructive dialogue between editors, reviewers, and authors. Review comments and editorial feedback aim to help authors strengthen their work. While all reviews remain confidential, journals may explore optional open review models in future to promote transparency and accountability.
Revision and Re-Evaluation
If revision is required, authors receive detailed comments and are invited to submit a revised version together with a response letter explaining all changes. Revised manuscripts are assessed by the handling editor and, when necessary, sent back to reviewers for further evaluation. A maximum of two major revision rounds is normally allowed to maintain efficiency.
Final Editorial Decision
The Editor-in-Chief or a delegated Academic Editor (one of the Editorial Board Members) makes the final decision after peer review. Decisions are based on:
- Quality and clarity of reviewer reports
- Author responses and improvements
- Overall scientific accuracy and contribution
Possible outcomes include: accept submission, revisions required, resubmit for review, resubmit elsewhere, or decline submission. Editorial independence is fully respected, and publisher staff do not make acceptance decisions.
Production and Publication
After acceptance, manuscripts move to the production stage.
This includes professional editing, typesetting, proofreading, and assignment of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Authors review the proofs before publication. The final version is published online in full open access and becomes immediately available to readers worldwide.
Appeals and Complaints
Authors who wish to appeal a decision may submit a written request explaining their reasons. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief together with an independent editorial advisor. The outcome may confirm the decision, invite further review, or allow resubmission. All appeals are handled fairly and confidentially.
Timeliness
CCP’s journals strive for an efficient workflow. Typical time frames are as follows:
- Pre-check: within 7 days
- Peer review: 3 to 4 weeks
- First decision: within 6 weeks
- Publication after acceptance: within 2 weeks
These targets may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity, but all efforts are made to provide timely communication.
Continuous Improvement
CCP continuously reviews its editorial policies to maintain excellence and fairness. Feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers is welcome to ensure that the process remains transparent, ethical, and aligned with best international practices.
