Our peer-review process is designed to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of submitted manuscripts.
The journal follows a structured peer-review process for evaluating manuscripts submitted for publication. The purpose of peer review is to assess the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodology, clarity, and overall contribution of a manuscript.
Manuscripts are evaluated through editorial screening and, where appropriate, independent peer review by reviewers with relevant subject expertise. The final editorial decision is based on the manuscript, reviewer comments, editorial assessment, and the journal's publication policies.
Every submitted manuscript is initially checked by the editorial team before it is considered for external peer review.
The initial screening may consider:
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or may be declined before external peer review.
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening may be assigned to independent reviewers with appropriate subject knowledge or research expertise.
Reviewer selection may take into consideration the subject area, research methodology, academic expertise, and availability of the reviewer. Any reviewer suggestions submitted by authors may be considered by the editorial team, but the final selection of reviewers remains an editorial responsibility.
Reviewers are expected to provide an objective, constructive, and academically relevant assessment of the manuscript.
The review may consider the following areas:
Assessment of the originality and contribution of the research to the relevant field.
Evaluation of the suitability and clarity of the research methods used.
Assessment of whether the results and analysis are adequately presented and supported.
Review of the relevance, adequacy, and appropriate use of cited literature.
Evaluation of manuscript structure, clarity, organization, and academic presentation.
Relevant ethical concerns and research-integrity issues may also be considered.
The journal may use an anonymous or identity-masked review procedure where applicable. The specific review arrangement may depend on the manuscript type and editorial requirements.
Reviewer identities and review reports are handled according to the journal's confidentiality requirements. Reviewers are not expected to contact authors directly unless specifically authorized by the editorial team.
After receiving the available review reports, the editorial team evaluates the manuscript and determines the appropriate editorial outcome.
| Decision | Description |
|---|---|
| Accept | The manuscript is considered suitable for publication, subject to any final editorial or formatting requirements. |
| Minor Revision | Limited corrections or clarifications are required before a final publication decision. |
| Major Revision | Substantial changes may be required. The revised manuscript may be evaluated again. |
| Reject | The manuscript is not considered suitable for publication in its submitted form. |
A recommendation from a reviewer is advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the authorized editor or editorial team.
If revisions are requested, authors should carefully consider all editorial and reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript within the specified period.
Authors may also be requested to provide a response to reviewers explaining how the comments have been addressed.
Submission of a revised manuscript does not automatically guarantee acceptance. Where necessary, the revised manuscript may be returned for additional review.
Reviewers are expected to:
Reviewers should not intentionally delay the review process or use unpublished information from a manuscript for their own benefit.
Reviewers should disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest that could affect the impartiality of their assessment.
Potential conflicts may include:
If a reviewer believes that a conflict may prevent an impartial assessment, the reviewer should inform the editorial team and may be asked to decline the assignment.
Manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewers should not distribute, reproduce, publish, or discuss manuscript material with unauthorized individuals.
Reviewers should also avoid using unpublished ideas, data, results, or interpretations obtained through the review process for their own research or professional advantage.
Any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, manipulated results, or other serious publication-ethics concern should be communicated confidentially to the editorial team.
Authors may request withdrawal of a manuscript by contacting the editorial office through the official communication channel of the journal.
An author may request withdrawal while the manuscript is under editorial consideration or peer review. The withdrawal request should normally be submitted by the corresponding author and should clearly identify the manuscript.
Authors should not simultaneously submit the same manuscript to another journal while it remains under active consideration unless the withdrawal has been formally confirmed.
Withdrawal after acceptance may require editorial review because publication-related work may already have been completed or initiated.
Where a publication or processing fee has already been paid, the payment will generally be treated as non-refundable in accordance with the fee policy stated below.
A published article cannot normally be withdrawn simply because an author changes their mind. If a serious issue affecting the reliability or integrity of a published article is identified, the journal may consider an appropriate post-publication action, such as correction, expression of concern, or retraction.
Payment of any applicable publication or processing fee does not guarantee manuscript acceptance or publication. Every manuscript remains subject to editorial evaluation, peer review, ethical requirements, and the journal's publication standards.
Once the applicable publication or processing fee has been paid, the payment is non-refundable.
No refund will normally be provided in circumstances including:
If a technical payment problem results in a duplicate transaction or a payment is deducted without being properly recorded by the journal, the author may contact the editorial office with the relevant transaction details.
Such cases will be examined individually after verification of the transaction. Any adjustment or refund in an exceptional technical case will be subject to verification by the journal.
The journal does not guarantee acceptance, publication, indexing, citation performance, or a specific publication date merely because a manuscript has been submitted or a publication fee has been paid.
Acceptance depends on the outcome of editorial assessment, peer review, manuscript quality, research integrity, scope, and compliance with the journal's publication requirements.
Authors who believe that a significant factual or procedural issue affected an editorial decision may contact the editorial office with a clear explanation of the concern.
An appeal should:
The editorial team may review the appeal and determine whether further consideration is appropriate.
The journal expects authors, reviewers, and editors to follow responsible scholarly publishing practices.
Concerns relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, authorship disputes, unethical research, manipulated peer review, citation manipulation, or other forms of publication misconduct may be investigated according to the journal's applicable procedures.
Appropriate editorial action may be taken when credible evidence of serious publication or research-integrity concerns is identified.
By submitting a manuscript, authors acknowledge that they understand and agree to the following:
Peer Review Policy: This policy may be updated periodically to reflect improvements in editorial and publication practices.