Review Policy. PsyCraft Journal will continue to be published online twice yearly (September and March) starting in June 2025. Manuscripts should be submitted in English. All manuscripts submitted for publication will undergo an initial editorial screening (format of the manuscript, originality of the work, language used), followed by a rigorous peer review based on a double-blind review process by at least two anonymous reviewers.
Reviewers are usually selected from the Editorial Board or Reviewers Panel. The editor will usually ask for reviewers' feedback before publishing your submission. In this case, the editor will wait until they have received all reviewer comments on your submission. The editor will then send you a decision email directly. The Editorial Board is the sole liaison between the author(s) and the manuscript reviewers.
Manuscripts submitted to PsyCraft Journal undergo “Desk Review” and “Peer Review” before being accepted and published. Our expert reviewers play a vital role in maintaining high standards for PsyCraft Journal, and all manuscripts are peer reviewed according to the following procedure.
Initial Manuscript Review. When a manuscript is submitted to the International PsyCraft Journal, it first undergoes a preliminary check known as a desk review. The Managing Editor first reviews all manuscripts submitted to the journal. In rare cases, the Managing Editor may accept an exceptional manuscript or an invited article at this stage. Manuscripts that do not follow the format specified by PsyCraft will be rejected at this stage.
- Not by PsyCraft Journal Guidelines (i.e., not in Manuscript format),
- Lack of originality, novelty, or significance (i.e., results that cannot be generalized,
- Incompatibility with the purpose and scope of the journal (i.e., topics that are not of interest to the journal's readers)
- Poor grammar or English language skills
- Flaws in study design (i.e., selection of a poor or unreliable method)
- Poor Writing and Organization (i.e., inadequate explanation of the rationale for the study, inadequate description of methods)
Area / Section Editor. Area/Section Editor who is initially assigned to a submission by an Editor. Area/Section Editors manage the Review Process of accepted submissions. Editors send requests to Area/Section Editors to see a submission through the editorial process. Submissions to PsyCraft assigned to a Section Editor by the Editor appear in that Section Editor's Submissions in Review queue. Section Editors only have access to the submissions assigned to them. Section Editors can reject
Peer Review Type. PsyCraft Journal uses double-blind review, where the reviewer and author remain anonymous throughout the review process. Therefore, all manuscript files (including any additional Files for Review) must be anonymized to allow for blind review. The author(s) must remove personal information, especially names, from the main documents.
How to select a reviewer. The editors select reviewers, the area/section editors, or the editorial board members to whom the task is delegated. Area/section editors are responsible for assigning articles to reviewers. Reviewers are matched with articles according to their expertise. The PsyCraft journal management system allows field editors to select from our database or add new reviewers.
Review Reports. Reviewers are asked to assess whether the manuscript meets the criteria in the following dimensions:
1. Presentation
2. Value of the work
3. Introduction to the manuscript
4. Methodology
5. Results
6. Relevance and Importance
7. Discussion and Conclusion.
8. References
9. Supplementary Materials
How Long Does the Review Process Take? The time required for the review process depends mainly on the reaction of the reviewers. The review process usually takes 3 to 8 months, depending on how many rounds of reviews are required. Please expect a slight delay if the review period coincides with a long holiday or Summer/Winter break.
All manuscripts submitted for publication in PsyCraft Journal will undergo a rigorous peer review based on an initial editorial screening followed by a blind review process by at least two anonymous reviewers. Section editors usually select reviewers from the journal reviewer pool. Normally, the editor asks for the referee's feedback before considering the authors' submission for publication. In this case, the editor waits until he/she has received all referee comments on the submission. If referee reports contradict each other or if a report is unnecessarily delayed, further expert opinion will be sought. In the rare cases where it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when one referee's report has completely convinced the Editor, decisions to accept, reject, or ask the author for revisions at this stage are made based solely on one referee's report.
Final Report. The editor's decision will be sent to the author together with the referees' recommendations. These recommendations usually include the referees' one-on-one comments. Recommended actions:
- ACCEPT: No revision needed,
- ACCEPT: It needs a little revision,
- MAJOR REVISION: Suggest revision and resubmit
- REJECT : (Give reasons to editors and authors in comments)
The Editor's Decision is final. Based on the referee report, Section Editors make recommendations to the Editor, who is responsible for the final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
Becoming a reviewer for PsyCraft Journal. If you are not currently a reviewer for PsyCraft Journal but would like to be considered as a reviewer, please contact the Editor. The benefits of reviewing for PsyCraft Journal include the opportunity to read, see, and evaluate the latest work in your research area early and contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documents.
Contact: psycraft@gmail.com