Peer Review Process
To ensure the quality and integrity of the research we publish, our journal employs a rigorous peer review process. Here’s how it works:
- Initial Submission and Pre-Review: All submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the editorial team to ensure they meet the basic standards of our journal, including relevance, originality, and adherence to submission guidelines.
- Double-Blind Review: Manuscripts that pass the pre-review stage are then sent to at least two independent reviewers. We apply a double-blind peer review process, where both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other. This ensures unbiased and fair evaluations.
- Reviewers’ Evaluation: Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including the originality of the research, the methodology used, the clarity of the presentation, and the contribution to the field. They provide their recommendations for one of the following actions:
- Accept as is
- Accept with minor revisions
- Major revisions required
- Decline
- Decision and Revisions: Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editorial team makes a decision. If revisions are required, authors will be given the opportunity to revise their manuscript in response to the reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to the reviewers for further evaluation.
- Final Decision: After all revisions have been made to the satisfaction of the reviewers and the editorial team, a final decision on acceptance is made.
- Publication: Once accepted, the manuscript will be prepared for publication and scheduled for inclusion in an upcoming issue of the journal.
We are committed to ensuring a transparent and efficient review process. The typical timeline for the peer review process is 13 weeks, although this may vary depending on the availability of reviewers and the complexity of the manuscript.