Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal via online submission system or the prescribed email (email@example.com). First the submissions are desk reviewed by the Editor in Chief. If it is passed in the desk review stage it is sent to two reviewers for double blind review. Reviewers’ comments and the recommendations are sent to the corresponding author for needed revisions thereafter. If the recommendations of two reviewers are contradictory, a third reviewer will be appointed. The revised submission is checked by the Editor in Chief or by an appointed member of the editorial board. If the revisions are acceptable, manuscript will be accepted for publication in KJHRM.
This review process will take 1 - 3 months.
Reviewers are requested to provide their comments and the evaluation for the following areas of the submitted manuscript.
(Whether the manuscript contains novel and significant insights which contributes for the enrichment of the existing body of knowledge)
- Introduction / Background pf the Study
(Whether the research gap(s) is (are) soundly reported with the objectives of the study)
- Literature Review
(Does a sufficient literature review is carried out and whether the literature review aligns with the objectives/propositions; proper flow of argument is built; rational behind the conceptual framework/hypotheses/propositions)
(Sound justification for the methodology adopted; clear details relating to the population, sample, sampling technique, measurement scales of variables, data collection and data analysis)
- Results & Discussion
(Whether the results and findings comply with research objectives; soundness of the conclusion; given implications 9both practical and theoretical implications]; Identified limitations and the directions provided for future research)
(Whether title clearly describes the article as whole?)
(Whether the abstract covers the content of the whole study)
- Tables, Figures, Equations
(Whether tables, figures and equations are adequate and appropriate; are they easy to interpret and understand?)
- Language and scholarly writing
(Whether proper language and scholarly writing has followed; manuscript is presented in a logical sequence)
(Whether the manuscripts has followed the recommended referencing style (APA 6th guidelines); appropriateness of in-text and end-text references)
Based on the evaluation, reviewer shall recommend one of the followings:
- Accept without revisions
- Accept with minor revisions
- Accept with major revisions
Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
All the manuscripts submitted to Kelaniya Journal of Human Resource Management (KJHRM) are screened for plagiarism via Grammarly Plagiarism Detection Tool and the journal rejects plagiarized manuscripts (above 30% of plagiarism ratio) with a comprehensive plagiarism report, without further consideration.
- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed