SUBMISSION

The publication frequency of the ProCEd journal is two (2) times a year, namely in April, August, in an open access format. 

Reciprocal Contribution in the Review Process

Reviewers’ Contribution to the Scholarly Community
The peer review process is an essential element in the academic publishing system and the continuous development of knowledge. To ensure transparency and quality, all authors who submit manuscripts to the Pertanika Journal of Professional Development and Continuing Education (ProCEd) are also expected to contribute back to the scholarly community by serving as reviewers when required.
Active involvement of authors in the peer review process helps build a strong academic network and enhances the overall quality of journal publications.

Double-Blind Review Process
ProCEd implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential from one another. This approach ensures fair, unbiased, and objective evaluation based on scholarly criteria. Reviewers are appointed according to their expertise in the relevant field and are tasked with assessing the academic strength, methodological accuracy, and contribution of the manuscript to the discipline. Manuscripts are evaluated based on the following principles:

• Reviews are conducted objectively, fairly, and professionally.
  
  

• Comments should not address the author’s personal attributes.
  
  

• All criticisms must be supported with clear scholarly reasoning.
  
  

• Feedback should be structured systematically and constructively.
  
  

• Suggestions are provided with the aim of improving the quality of the manuscript.
  
  

Review and Quality Monitoring Process
Every manuscript received undergoes an initial screening by the Editorial Board to determine its suitability with the journal’s scope and target readership. Manuscripts that pass this screening are sent to one or two reviewers, depending on the content requirements. In certain cases, technical experts such as statisticians or specialists in specific areas may be consulted.
The quality of reviews is periodically assessed by the Editor-in-Chief to ensure the peer review process meets established academic standards. This feedback is used to improve the review process as well as in the selection of future reviewers. Reviewer identities and performance remain confidential and are known only to the Editor-in-Chief.

Responsibilities of Reviewers and Editorial Support
Reviewers are encouraged to provide clear recommendations on whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. However, the final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on all reviews received, especially in cases of differing opinions among reviewers.
ProCEd provides reviewers with guidelines and regular updates regarding their roles. Periodic assessments of review quality are also carried out to ensure consistency, accuracy, and effectiveness of the peer review process.

Flowchart of the Review Process
To facilitate understanding of the editorial process, ProCEd provides a flowchart of the double-blind peer review system, which details every step from submission to the final publication decision. The chart also indicates the expected timeframe for each stage.
📌 The ProCEd review flowchart (updated April 2026) will be displayed on the journal’s website for reference by all parties involved.