CITRAKARA implements a double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of submitted manuscripts.

The review process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Screening
   The Editor checks the manuscript for conformity with the journal's focus and scope, author guidelines, completeness, and basic publication ethics requirements. A similarity check may also be conducted.

2. Reviewer Assignment
   Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential.

3. Peer Review
   Reviewers evaluate the manuscript using the Article Evaluation Form for Reviewers, covering originality, research methodology, analysis, results and discussion, contribution, references, and academic presentation.

4. Editorial Decision
   Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor determines one of the following decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. If necessary, the Editor may request an additional reviewer.

5. Revision and Re-review
   Authors are required to respond to reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript when revisions are requested. Manuscripts requiring major revision may be reviewed again.

6. Final Decision and Publication
   Manuscripts that meet the required academic standards receive final acceptance and proceed to copyediting, layout, and publication.

The standard review period is approximately 1–2 weeks, although the actual duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, revision requirements, and the editorial process.

Review Workflow

Submission → Initial Screening → Similarity Check → Reviewer Assignment → Double-Blind Review → Editorial Decision → Revision/Re-review → Final Acceptance → Publication