Peer Review Process

The journal's peer-review process follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process conducted by independent experts. We employ a double-blind review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. Authors' identities are not disclosed to reviewers, and reviewers' identities are not disclosed to authors. This is done within the shortest given time. The journal,  above all, strives to return reviewers’ comments to authors at least within 3 weeks.

1. Manuscripts that do not adhere to the journal's scope, style, length, language accuracy, tolerable plagiarism rate, acceptable AI detection rate, or referencing style guidelines will be rejected. Authors are welcome to revise their submissions to meet these criteria; however, revised manuscripts must be submitted as new submissions.

2. Reviewers evaluate each manuscript based on its quality. 

3. Authors must address all reviewer comments in a point-by-point response. If an author disagrees with a reviewer’s suggestion, they must provide a clear and well-reasoned explanation. This ensures a constructive dialogue between authors and reviewers, ultimately enhancing the quality of the manuscript.

4. The editorial team reserves the right to edit manuscripts for format consistency, language clarity, and referencing accuracy. These adjustments are intended to improve the overall readability of the manuscript without altering its substantive content.

5. A Letter of Acceptance (LoA) is issued once an article has completed the peer-review process, undergone all required revisions, and been formally accepted for publication in a journal issue.