Authors deserve to know what happens to a manuscript after they click submit — not just "under review" for months. This note walks through the ChainKnow Press pipeline, stage by stage, including the time commitments we hold ourselves to.

Step 1 — Editorial Pre-Check (within 48 hours)

An in-house editor checks every submission for scope fit, basic methodological soundness, complete ethics statements and an ORCID-verified corresponding author. Roughly a fifth of submissions are returned here with a clear, actionable reason — a service to authors, since an unusable manuscript should not spend three months in a queue to be told so.

Step 2 — Reviewer Matching

Matched editors select two to three reviewers from our rising-scientist reviewer pool — active researchers with strong recent citation records — matched by subfield and method. Where a submission touches a fast-moving or high-stakes area, an advisory reviewer provides an additional direction check. Reviewers confirm conflicts of interest before accepting.

Step 3 — Double-Blind Review

External review is double-blind: authors and reviewers are anonymous to each other. Reviewers assess the question, method, evidence and clarity — never the author's title, institution or nationality, which they do not see.

Step 4 — Decision (target: four weeks)

The handling editor weighs the reports and issues one of four outcomes: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject with constructive feedback. Our commitment is a first decision within four weeks of passing pre-check. Where reviewers miss the window, replacement reviewers are appointed rather than waiting indefinitely.

Step 5 — Revision and Final Check

Revised manuscripts are checked against the reviewer points; major revisions may return to the original reviewers. A production editor then verifies figures, references, data and code availability statements before acceptance is confirmed.

Step 6 — Production, DOI and Indexing

Accepted articles are typeset, assigned a DOI through Crossref, published online and prepared for indexing registration. The corresponding author receives a publication-ready PDF and the article record.

Recognition, Appeals and Ethics

Reviewers receive public acknowledgement in an annual review-of-reviewers and may opt to have their review activity recognized through ORCID. Authors may appeal any decision by writing to the editorial office with a point-by-point response; appeals are handled by an editor not involved in the original decision. Our policies follow COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidance, and we take research-integrity concerns seriously regardless of an author's career stage.