PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Peer Review Process

Krygma: Journal of Theology and Christian Education applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published articles. The journal follows the ethical standards and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Type of Peer Review

The journal employs a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to ensure objectivity and impartiality.

Reviewer Selection

Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers who possess expertise relevant to the manuscript’s subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope

  • Originality and contribution to the field

  • Theoretical framework and literature review

  • Research methodology and data analysis (if applicable)

  • Clarity of argumentation and academic writing

  • Ethical considerations and proper citation practices

Review Process

Reviewers provide constructive, objective, and scholarly feedback, along with a recommendation to accept, revise, or reject the manuscript. All reviews are conducted confidentially. Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the timeframe specified by the editorial team.

Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding publication is made by the editor based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations. In cases of conflicting reviews, the editor may seek additional reviewers or make a decision based on editorial judgment.

Revision and Resubmission

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts must be accompanied by a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed.

Ethical Compliance

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and must not use unpublished material for personal research. Any suspected ethical misconduct identified during the review process will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.