Peer Review Process
Manuscripts must be prepared following the Author Guidelines, and submissions may be returned without scientific review if they fail to meet all requirements, lack proper formatting, or cannot be reliably downloaded.
Each manuscript must be an original and independent work by the author(s). The peer review process is shown as follows:
Initial Assessment
- After submission, the editorial team conducts a preliminary screening.
- Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s aims and scope or fail to meet basic quality standards are rejected without review.
Reviewer Selection
- Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two expert reviewers.
- The journal uses a double-anonymous peer review: authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identities.
- Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, often matched via keywords provided in the manuscript.
Review Process
- Reviewers assess the manuscript on aspects such as: (1) Originality, (2) Methodology, (3) Clarity, and (4) Contribution to the field
- Each reviewer submits detailed feedback and a recommendation: (1) Accept, (2) Minor/Major Revision, and (3) Reject
Editor’s Decision
- The editor evaluates the reviewers’ feedback and decides whether to: (1) Accept, (2) Reject, or (3) Request revision
- If revisions are needed, authors receive a deadline to revise and resubmit the manuscript.
Revision and Resubmission
- Authors revise their manuscript and respond to each comment from reviewers.
- The revised manuscript may be returned to the same reviewers for re-evaluation, or the editor may decide based on the revisions alone.
Final Decision
- After the revision phase, the editor makes a final decision: (1) Accept for Publication, (2) Reject
- The outcome is communicated to both the authors and reviewers.
The Peer Review Process
