This journal employs a double-blind peer-review system for all submitted manuscripts. Neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other’s identities during the evaluation. All communications between authors and reviewers take place via the journal’s online editorial system and are facilitated by secure email notifications. Reviewers submit their reports through a protected online platform, ensuring confidentiality and data protection.

A manuscript is accepted for publication if it makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the research topic and demonstrates the potential to influence the current body of knowledge in its field. Additionally, the manuscript must adhere to the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines. Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision before they are sent out for peer review.

• Initial Check 01
  • The editorial team conducts a preliminary assessment to verify that the manuscript meets the journal’s technical requirements.
  • The text is checked for plagiarism using Turnitin, and a minimum of 75% originality is required.
• Assignment to Reviewers 02
  • Once the manuscript passes this initial screening, it is assigned to two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field(s).
  • These reviewers assess the scientific merit of the manuscript, its methodological soundness, and its overall contribution to the discipline.
• Revision and Feedback 03
  • If the reviewers recommend revisions, the manuscript is returned to the authors for amendments. Authors are expected to address all suggested modifications or provide clear justifications for any disputed points.
  • The revised manuscript may undergo an additional round of peer review, depending on the extent of the requested changes.
• Final Decision 04
  • While reviewers can recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection, the final decision rests with the journal’s editorial board.
  • The editorial board considers reviewers’ comments, the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s scope, and the authors’ responsiveness to feedback before making a decision.

In keeping with the double-blind policy, the journal does not disclose reviewers’ identities to authors or other external parties. Likewise, authors’ identities are not revealed to reviewers. All involved parties are expected to maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process.

• Conflict of Interest:

  Reviewers must promptly inform the editorial team if they recognize any conflict of interest that might compromise their impartiality.

• Ethical Reporting:

  Reviewers are obligated to alert the editorial office if they detect instances of plagiarism, data falsification, or other unethical practices in the manuscript.

• Objectivity:

  Reviewers must provide fair, objective, and constructive evaluations of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses, offering clear, actionable feedback to help authors improve the quality of their work.