Peer Review Process

1. Peer Review Type

Knowledge and Child Development in Early Childhood and Kindergarten (KACIAK) applies a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This system is intended to support an unbiased, fair, objective, and academically rigorous evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

2. Editorial and Review Process

Initial Screening (Desk Evaluation)

Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the Editorial Office to ensure:

  • Alignment with the journal’s scope in early childhood development, early childhood education, kindergarten education, child psychology, learning, and related disciplines
  • Compliance with the journal's author guidelines and submission requirements
  • Adequate academic quality, originality, structure, and methodological clarity
  • Appropriate ethical considerations in research involving children, families, teachers, or educational institutions

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic standards, fail to comply with submission requirements, or fall outside the journal’s scope may be rejected without external review.

Plagiarism Check

All submitted manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection tools to assess originality and prevent academic misconduct. Manuscripts containing substantial levels of plagiarism, inappropriate text reuse, duplicate publication, or other forms of academic misconduct may be rejected or returned to the authors for clarification and revision.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the submitted research, such as early childhood education, child development, kindergarten education, child psychology, early childhood learning, curriculum and teaching strategies, parenting and family education, inclusive education, educational technology, child health and well-being, educational assessment, teacher education, and related fields.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, subject expertise, research experience, and relevance to the manuscript. The review process follows internationally recognized practices in scholarly publishing.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' reports and the Editor's assessment, one of the following decisions may be made:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

  • Relevance to early childhood development, early childhood education, kindergarten education, or related fields
  • Originality and contribution to knowledge and practice in early childhood studies
  • Clarity and relevance of the research problem, objectives, and research questions
  • Theoretical foundation and relevance of the literature review
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology
  • Ethical considerations, particularly for research involving children and other vulnerable participants
  • Quality and adequacy of data collection, analysis, and interpretation
  • Validity and reliability of research findings, where applicable
  • Relevance and significance of the discussion and conclusions
  • Quality of educational, developmental, or practical implications
  • Quality of academic writing, presentation, and manuscript organization
  • Adequacy and relevance of references
  • Compliance with ethical standards and responsible research practices

4. Review Timeline

Knowledge and Child Development in Early Childhood and Kindergarten (KACIAK) is committed to maintaining an efficient and timely peer review process:

  • Average review time: 1–3 weeks
  • First decision: approximately 2–4 weeks after submission

The actual review period may vary depending on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, revision requirements, and editorial workload.

5. Ethical Standards and Transparency

The journal adheres to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and follows the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts
  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest
  • Provide objective, constructive, and scientifically appropriate feedback
  • Avoid using unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal research purposes
  • Pay particular attention to ethical issues in studies involving children and other vulnerable participants
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or inform the editor if they are unable to do so

6. Author Revisions

Authors receiving a revision decision are expected to:

  • Address all reviewer and editorial comments carefully and systematically
  • Provide a detailed response to each comment
  • Clearly indicate revisions made to the manuscript
  • Provide additional information or clarification regarding research methods, participants, ethical procedures, data analysis, or findings when requested
  • Resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified timeframe

Failure to adequately address reviewer or editorial comments may result in further revision or rejection of the manuscript.

7. Final Decision

The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated Editor, taking into consideration:

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • Quality and completeness of author revisions
  • Scientific and academic validity
  • Originality and contribution to early childhood knowledge and practice
  • Relevance to the journal's scope
  • Ethical compliance
  • Overall academic merit of the manuscript

Reviewer recommendations are considered carefully but do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

8. Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts will undergo the journal's production process, which may include:

  • Professional copyediting
  • English language and proofreading checks
  • Layout and formatting
  • Final author proof review, where applicable
  • Assignment of publication metadata and DOI

All articles are published under an open access model, providing free and immediate access to readers worldwide in accordance with the journal's open access policy.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision by submitting a formal appeal with clear and substantive justification. Appeals should address specific concerns regarding the editorial or peer-review process.

Appeals will be considered objectively by the editorial team. Where appropriate, an additional editorial assessment or independent review may be conducted. The outcome of an appeal is determined by the journal's editorial procedures.

10. General Provisions

The journal may assign additional reviewers when necessary, particularly when specialized expertise is required or when reviewer recommendations substantially differ.

A manuscript may be returned for additional revision or reassessment when necessary to ensure its academic quality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and relevance to early childhood development and education.

Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts at any stage of the editorial process if serious ethical concerns, substantial methodological problems, plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication or falsification of data, inappropriate research involving children, or other forms of academic misconduct are identified.