Peer Review: The critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to JY by experts in the relevant field who are independent of the JY’s editorial team. Its primary purpose is to provide editors with the necessary information to make informed decisions regarding publication and to assist authors in improving the quality, rigor, and clarity of their work; 

Double-Blind Peer Review: In this model, JY ensures that: 

Authors are not informed of the identities of the reviewers; 

Reviewers are not informed of the identities of the authors. This approach aims to minimize potential biases arising from factors such as an author’s reputation, institutional affiliation, nationality, or gender, thereby ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated primarily on their scholarly merit.  

Role of Reviewers Reviewers are responsible for providing expert, constructive, and impartial feedback on the manuscript’s scholarly content, methodological rigor, and overall presentation; 

Role of Editors: Editors are responsible for managing the peer review process, select appropriate reviewers, including evaluating and vetting reviewer suggestions made by authors, assess the reviewers feedback, and make final editorial decisions regarding submitted manuscript. 

Mandate for Peer Review. All eligible manuscripts submitted to JY are subject to a rigorous double-blind peer review process before a final publication decision is made.; 

Peer Review Model. JY exclusively employs a double-blind peer review model for all eligible submissions; 

Selection of Reviewers: 

Reviewers are selected by the handling editor based on their demonstrated expertise in the manuscript’s subject area, scholarly reputation, availability, and ability to provide an objective, critical, and constructive assessment; 

Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest involving the authors or the research before accepting an invitation to review. Reviewers must decline the invitation if a significant conflict of interest exists; 

JY typically seeks to obtain at least two independent peer review reports for each manuscript undergoing full peer review.  

Confidentiality in Peer Review:  

All materials related to the peer review process, including manuscripts, reviewer reports, and related correspondence, are treated as strictly confidential by JY’s editors, reviewers, and journal staff; 

Reviewers must not disclose any information regarding the manuscript or its review to any third party without prior authorization from JY; 

Information obtained during the peer review process must not be used by reviewers for personal advantage or to disadvantage, discredit, or otherwise harm others. 

Objectivity, Constructiveness, and Timeliness: 

Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively and provide impartial, specific, and constructive feedback aimed at improving the quality of the manuscript; 

All comments must be professional and courteous, focusing on the manuscript’s scholarly content rather than making personal criticisms of the authors; 

Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the timeframe specified by JY to ensure that authors receive timely feedback. 

Copyright of Review Reports: 

Peer reviewers who submit review reports to JY retain the copyright in their review reports;  

JY treats review reports as confidential communications. Anonymized review reports will be shared with the authors of the respective manuscripts. JY will not publish review reports or disclose reviewers’ identities to authors or third parties without the explicit permission of the respective reviewers, except where disclosure is required by law or necessary for the investigation of suspected research or publication misconduct.  

Editorial Decision-Making: 

The final decision regarding the publication of a manuscript—including acceptance, rejection, or a request for revision—rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor; 

The decision is based on the reviewers’ evaluation, the editor’s independent assessment of the manuscript’s quality and suitability for publication in JY, and the manuscript’s fit with JY’s scope its compliance with ethical standards;  

Editorial decisions are made independently and are based solely on the scholarly merit of the manuscript. 

Appeals Process. Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe that the decision resulted from a significant misunderstanding, procedural error, or evidence of bias in the peer review process, in accordance with JY’s Policy on Complaints and Appeals. 

Guidance and Ethical Conduct for Reviewers: 

JY provides peer reviewers with clear guidelines on their roles and responsibilities, the proper conduct of peer review, and applicable ethical standards, drawing on the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers; 

Reviewers are expected to adhere to these ethical guidelines, including maintaining confidentiality, disclosing any conflicts of interest, and reporting suspected research or publication misconduct. 

Management of the Peer Review Process. JY employs a robust online editorial management system to facilitate an efficient, fair, and transparent peer review process. The system enables JY to track manuscript progress, manage reviewer assignments, and maintain comprehensive records throughout the editorial and peer review process. 

Manuscript Preparation for Double-Blind Review: 

Authors are responsible for preparing their manuscripts in a manner that conceals their identities from reviewers. Specific requirements include:  

Authors must submit a separate title page containing the names of all authors, their affiliations and contact information, as well as any acknowledgments. The title page will not be shared with reviewers; 

Authors must ensure that the main manuscript file, including figures, tables, and supplementary materials intended for review, is fully anonymized. This includes removing all author names, affiliations, and any direct references to the authors’ previous work that could reveal their identities. Where self-identifying references are necessary, authors should use neutral, third-person phrasing (e.g., “Previous studies have shown [citation]” rather than “Our previous work showed [citation]”); 

Authors must remove all identifying information from the properties and metadata of the electronic manuscript file. 

Reviewer Anonymity: 

JY’s editorial management system is configured to ensure that reviewers’ identities remain confidential and are not disclosed to authors;  

Reviewers are explicitly instructed not to include any information in their review reports or comments to authors that could disclose their identity. 

Conducting and Submitting the Review: 

Reviewers are provided with clear guidelines and, where applicable, a structured review form to support their assessment. They evaluate manuscripts based on criteria including originality, significance of the contribution, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and compliance with relevant ethical standards;  

Review reports should include specific comments and constructive suggestions to help authors improve their manuscripts, as well as confidential comments to the editor to support the editorial decision-making process;  

Reviewers are encouraged to notify the editor of any ethical concerns, including suspected plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publication, or other forms of research or publication misconduct; 

All review reports must be submitted through JY’s online editorial management system by the agreed-upon deadline. 

Communication of Editorial Decisions: 

The handling editor carefully considers all reviewer reports and may seek additional reviews, where necessary, before making an editorial decision;  

Authors are provided with the anonymized reviewer comments and the editor’s decision letter, which explains the basis for the editorial decision. 

Manuscript Revisions: 

If revisions are requested, authors are expected to address all comments from the reviewers and editor thoroughly and systematically. A detailed, point-by-point response to each comment must accompany the revised manuscript upon resubmission; 

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation or assessed directly by the handling editor, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions. 

Ethical Obligations for Reviewers. JY expects all reviewers to adhere to the highest ethical standards, including: 

Confidentiality: Treat the manuscript and the peer review process as strictly confidential; 

Objectivity: Provide an objective, impartial, and unbiased assessment of the manuscript; 

Expertise: Accept review assignments only for manuscripts within their areas of expertise; 

Timeliness: Complete and submit review reports within the agreed-upon deadline; 

Constructiveness: Provide specific, respectful, and constructive feedback intended to help authors improve their work; 

Non-Exploitation: Do not use information obtained from the manuscript for personal or third-party advantage; 

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment; 

Reporting Concerns: Promptly alert the editor to any ethical concerns regarding the manuscript or the peer review process;  

No Delegation: Do not delegate or transfer a review assignment to another person without prior permission from JY. 

Recognition of Reviewers. JY recognizes and values the important contributions of its peer reviewers. While reviewer identities remain confidential under the double-blind peer review process, JY may publicly acknowledge reviewers annually, for example, by publishing a list on its website or in a journal issue, subject to the reviewers’ explicit consent. JY may also explore integration with services that provide formal recognition for peer review contributions.