How We Review
Editorial Process & Rubric
Everything that happens to your work after submission — who reads it, what they score, and what every outcome means. Read this before you submit.
100-pt scored rubric
4–6 wk decision window
0 FCFA if declined
This page explains exactly what happens to your work after you submit it, who reads it, what they look for, and what each possible outcome means. If anything here is unclear, email research@kongnyuyevans.com and we will answer.
One thing we say plainly: our reviewed track uses named-editor review. A paper accepted here has been read, evaluated, and accepted by a named editor with subject-matter authority — not by an anonymous panel. It is not peer review in the classic sense. We call it what it is, and every accepted paper shows its full review history on its own page.
Three tracks, three honest labels
Every publication carries one of three labels — telling you exactly how much scrutiny the work has received.
New Research
Manuscripts not published anywhere else. Read and scored by a named editor from the Editorial Board, matched to your discipline. Published only after acceptance.
Preprints & Working Papers
Checked for completeness, authorship, and originality — then published with a permanent, citable URL. No review.
Already-Published Work
Indexed for discoverability with full citation to the original publisher. Review was done by the original publisher, not by us.
A preprint is not a lesser journal article. It is a different kind of object: early, citable, honest about its stage. The label travels with the paper permanently.
The named-editor review, step by step
Six stages, from submission to a permanent, citable page.
Submission
You submit through Submit Your Work and confirm the Contributor Agreement.
Editorial screening
Within 1 week: completeness, template formatting, scope fit, plagiarism screening.
Editor assignment
A named, discipline-matched editor is assigned. Conflicted editors are never assigned.
Evaluation
The editor scores the full manuscript against the rubric below and signs the decision.
Decision
Within 4–6 weeks: one of four outcomes, with the scored rubric attached.
Publication
A permanent URL, Scholar-compatible metadata, and a public Review History box.
The Editorial Review Rubric
The exact scoring sheet our editors use — score 0–5 per criterion, weighted to 100 points total. Darker cards carry more weight.
Significance & contribution
Is the research question real and clearly stated? Does the paper add new evidence, angle, or context — especially Cameroonian/African? Would a reader cite this?
Methodological soundness
Design fits the question. Sample and method stated and justified. Claims do not exceed what the method supports.
Literature grounding
Thematic, not a list of summaries. Recent sources. Ends with an explicit gap statement the paper fills.
Data & analysis integrity
Honest reporting, including uncomfortable findings. Correct statistics. No selective reporting.
Structure & clarity
Follows the ECP template. Abstract states problem, method, result, significance clearly.
Ethics & declarations
Ethics approval, competing interests, funding declared. Complete APA 7th references.
Fit & context
Falls within ECP’s scope and genuinely engages African/Cameroonian context where claimed.
Scoring bands and decisions
75–100
Accept. No criterion scored 0–1. Published with at most light copyediting.
60–74
Minor revision. Targeted fixes, one round, editor verifies.
45–59
Major revision. Real weaknesses, one round with re-review.
Below 45
Decline. Scored rubric and written reasons returned.
Immediate decline, regardless of score: plagiarism; fabricated or falsified data; duplicate submission elsewhere; missing ethics approval; refusal to make required declarations.
The four decisions, honestly defined
- Accept: The paper will be published. You are then invoiced the 20,000 FCFA acceptance fee.
- Minor revision: Specific required changes listed. You have 4 weeks; the editor verifies and decides.
- Major revision: Substantial required changes listed. You have 8 weeks; the revision goes back to the same editor for re-review.
- Decline: You receive the scored rubric and written comments. No fee is owed. The same applies if you withdraw before a final decision.
Fees, plainly
Because the reviewed-track fee is payable only on acceptance, a rejected or withdrawn manuscript never pays. The review is done either way — that risk is ours, not yours. Undergraduate students receive an automatic 50% waiver. Hardship waivers may be requested at research@kongnyuyevans.com — granted counts are published annually.
Payment is by MTN Mobile Money. Publication follows receipt of payment; work is licensed CC BY 4.0 and you retain full copyright. Already-published work indexed here transfers no rights at all.
Conflicts of interest and recusal
- Editors must declare any personal, financial, supervisory, or close institutional relationship with an author and recuse themselves from that manuscript. If you believe your assigned editor has an undisclosed conflict, write to us and the paper will be reassigned. Editors never handle papers by their own students, colleagues, or family members.
Appeals
- If you believe a decision misapplied the rubric, you may appeal within 30 days, in writing, stating which criterion was scored incorrectly. A second editor — never the original reviewer — re-scores the manuscript blind to the first score. The second score stands and is never averaged with the first.
After publication
- Corrections. Significant errors get a dated, visible correction on the paper’s page.
- Retraction. Proven misconduct results in retraction, with a public notice stating why, permanently visible.
- Versioning for preprints. New versions stay accessible alongside old ones — a preprint stays labeled a preprint even at version 3.
Before you submit — the 8-point self-check
- My abstract states problem, method, key result, and significance — in that order, 150–250 words.
- My literature review is thematic and ends with an explicit gap statement.
- My methodology states sample, sampling method, size, and instruments — justified.
- My results and discussion are separate sections; no new results in discussion.
- My references are APA 7th edition, alphabetized, with DOIs where they exist.
- My declarations (ethics, competing interests, funding, data availability) are complete.
- My paper follows the ECP Publication Template.
- My paper has not been published elsewhere and is not under review anywhere else.
Every point maps directly to a rubric criterion. If you can check all eight, you’re ready: Submit Your Work.
