Review Policy

1. Peer Review Process

  • The journal follows a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and objectivity.

  • Submitted manuscripts are initially screened by the editorial team to assess their relevance, originality, and adherence to the journal's guidelines.

  • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the respective field.

  • Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

    • Originality: Novelty and uniqueness of the research.

    • Methodology: Appropriateness and rigor of the research methods.

    • Clarity and Structure: Organization, readability, and presentation of the content.

    • Relevance: Contribution to the field of study.

    • References and Citations: Proper citation of sources and compliance with the journal’s referencing style.

  • Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations, which may include:

    • Accept without revisions.

    • Accept with minor or major revisions.

    • Reject with reasons provided.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the review process and not disclose any information regarding the manuscript or its content.

  • Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and fairly, providing constructive and unbiased feedback.

  • Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence their evaluation of the manuscript.

  • Timely Review: Reviewers are expected to complete their assessments within the specified timeframe to avoid delays in the publication process.

3. Editorial Decision and Author Communication

  • The editorial team makes the final decision on the manuscript based on reviewer comments and the journal's standards.

  • Authors receive detailed feedback from the reviewers, including:

    • Specific areas for improvement.

    • Clarifications on methodology or interpretations.

    • Suggestions for enhancing the overall quality of the manuscript.

4. Review Timelines

  • The journal strives to maintain an efficient and fast review process to enable rapid publication, with the following general timeline:

    • Initial screening: 3 days.

    • Peer review process: 4 weeks.

    • Final decision: 1-2 weeks after the final review.

5. Appeals and Disputes

  • Authors have the right to appeal a rejection decision by providing a detailed justification addressing the reviewers’ comments.

  • The journal will conduct an independent review of the appeal.

  • The journal's decision on the appeal is final and binding.