Double-Blind Peer Review
The journal follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, and ethically conducted research. Under this model, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process, ensuring an impartial, objective, and unbiased evaluation based solely on the scholarly merit, originality, methodology, significance, and scientific contribution of the submitted manuscript.
Review Process
Initial Editorial Assessment
Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to verify its scope, originality, compliance with the journal's author guidelines, ethical standards, and plagiarism policy.
Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that successfully pass this preliminary screening are assigned to at least two independent subject experts for comprehensive peer review.
Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript against the journal's criteria and provide detailed feedback with a recommendation.
Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the Editor's assessment, one of the following decisions is communicated to the corresponding author: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
Author Revision
Authors receiving revision requests are expected to submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed point-by-point response to reviewers' comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief reserves the final authority over all editorial decisions after any re-review of revised manuscripts.
Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including:
- Originality and novelty of the research
- Scientific and methodological rigor
- Relevance to the journal's scope
- Quality of analysis and interpretation
- Clarity, organization, and presentation
- Validity of conclusions
- Compliance with ethical and publication standards
Review Timeline
The journal strives to complete the initial peer-review process within 2–4 weeks of submission.
| Stage | Duration |
|---|---|
| Initial Editorial Assessment | 3–5 days |
| Peer Review (initial) | 2–4 weeks |
| Author Revision | 1–2 weeks (typical) |
| Re-review (if required) | 1–2 weeks |
| Online First after acceptance | As soon as production is complete |
Decision Types
- Accept — The manuscript is accepted for publication.
- Minor Revision — Limited changes are required; re-review may not be necessary.
- Major Revision — Substantial changes are required; revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by reviewers.
- Reject — The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or scope.