Manuscripts submitted to this online journal will be peer-reviewed. The accepted manuscript will be immediately available online and are free to read and download  following the journal peer-reviewing process. The language used in this Journal is English.

The journal employs a rigourous peer review process by external reviewers to ensure the scientific accuracy and validity of published articles in addition to a fair peer review process. InaJCC follows a fast and fair double-blind peer review process, and also ensures the quality of published articles. It is a time-consuming process, therefore, the InaJCC Editorial Board, writers, and audience appreciate your willingness to accept your responsibility and dedication. Reviewing process for each manuscript requires at least 2 reviewers who can provide useful and useful comments about the manuscript sent in and would take 4 weeks. The final decision on acceptance or rejection will be decided by the Editorial Board. Maintaining InaJCC as a high-quality scientific journal depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and ability to be objective, fair and broad-minded in evaluating the manuscript. If an Editor, Editorial Board, member, or employee submits a manuscript, it is assigned to an Independent Editor who will handle peer review, and details regarding the review process or the decision are not accessible to Editor, Editorial Board, or employee. All Editors, reviewers, and authors shall adhere to InaJCC editorial policies which follows and adapts Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing in managing all aspects of publication ethics and in ensuring a high ethical standard for all involved parties.

Here list of items that need to be reviewed:

  1. Novelty of the topic
  2. Originality
  3. Scientific reliability
  4. Valuable contribution to the science
  5. Adding new aspects to the existed field of study
  6. Ethical aspects
  7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
  8. References provided to substantiate the content
  9. Grammar, punctuation, and spelling
  10. Scientific misconduct