Archiving Policy

Peer Review Policy

The journal’s policy is to have manuscripts reviewed by three expert reviewers. JCCC utilizes a double-blind peer review process in which the reviewer and author's names and information are withheld from the other. All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible while maintaining rigour. Reviewers make comments to the author and recommendations to Editor who then makes the final decision.

As part of the submission process, you can be asked to provide the names of peers who could be called upon to review your manuscript. Recommended reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Please be aware of any conflicts of interest when recommending reviewers. Examples of conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to) the below:

  • The reviewer should have no prior knowledge of your submission
  • The reviewer should not have recently collaborated with any of the authors
  • Reviewer nominees from the same institution as any of the authors are not permitted

Please note that the Editors are not obliged to invite/ reject any recommended/ opposed reviewers to assess your manuscript.

The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their manuscripts for possible publication in the journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor / Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process.

Journal of Content Community & Communication is committed to delivering high-quality, peer-review for your paper. The Editor in Chief will also issue a letter of thanks for doing the high-quality peer-review work for the journal