Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy

The journal applies a double-blind peer review process to all research articles submitted for publication. In this process, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other to ensure an unbiased and independent assessment. The journal adheres to recognized standards of publication ethics and peer review integrity, consistent with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is examined by the Editorial Office to determine its suitability for the journal. This initial assessment verifies that the manuscript aligns with the journal’s aims and scope, complies with submission guidelines, adheres to ethical requirements, and meets overall academic standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers outside the editorial team with relevant expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their scholarly competence and are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest. The journal takes reasonable steps to ensure that the peer review process is fair, objective, and timely.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts according to established scholarly criteria, including originality, relevance, theoretical or conceptual contribution, methodological soundness, clarity of analysis, ethical compliance, and adequacy of references. Review reports should be constructive and provide clear guidance to authors on how to improve the quality of their work.

Editorial Decision-Making

The final decision on a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Handling Editor, taking into account the reviewers’ reports and the journal’s editorial standards. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the editorial decision. Where reviewer opinions differ substantially, the editor may seek an additional review or exercise editorial judgement.

Revisions

Authors receiving a decision of minor or major revision are required to submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response to reviewers’ comments within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly when substantial changes have been requested.

Acceptance and Publication

A manuscript is accepted for publication only after the editor is satisfied that all reviewer concerns have been adequately addressed and that the manuscript meets the journal’s academic and ethical standards. Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting and proofreading before publication.

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to conduct their reviews objectively, maintain confidentiality, and refrain from using unpublished material for personal gain. The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, or any other form of unethical research or publication practice. Allegations of misconduct are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.