Peer review process

All submitted manuscripts undergo specialized anonymous peer review under a double-blind system, which includes the following stages:

Initial Screening
The editor conducts a preliminary review of the manuscript to assess its relevance, adherence to quality standards, and alignment with the journal's editorial policy. If deemed suitable, the manuscript proceeds to external review.

External Review
Once past the initial screening (which may require preliminary revisions), the manuscript is assigned to at least two expert reviewers in the relevant field. These reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript and submit their assessments to the editor-in-chief, following the journal's predefined evaluation criteria.

Possible Verdicts
The manuscript may be:
• Rejected
• Accepted with major revisions
• Accepted with minor revisions
• Accepted without revisions
If evaluations conflict (e.g., one reviewer recommends acceptance while another suggests rejection), a third reviewer is appointed to resolve the discrepancy.

Review Outcome Communication
The editor sends the reviewers' comments to the authors, who must:
• Implement the required revisions, clearly marking all changes in the manuscript.
• Submit a response letter addressing each comment point-by-point, justifying any unaddressed concerns with verifiable sources.

Revision deadlines
• Minor revisions: 10 days
• Major revisions: 15 days
If the manuscript is rejected, the authors receive the reviewers' reports along with the decision.

Revision Review
The revised manuscript is sent back to the original reviewers (if available) for final evaluation. If only one or none of the reviewers respond, the editor assesses the revisions and makes the final decision.

Appeals
Authors may appeal a decision within 3 business days by submitting a rebuttal letter with:
• Counterarguments or proposed solutions.
• Supporting literature to demonstrate reviewer bias or misinterpretation.
The editor-in-chief’s decision on appeals is final.

Review Timeline
The evaluation process typically takes 1–2 months, depending on reviewer availability and author responsiveness. Delays are communicated to authors by the editor.

Reviewer Guidelines
Before accepting a review invitation, reviewers must:
• Confirm the manuscript falls within their expertise.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves if necessary.
• Maintain confidentiality before, during, and after the review process.

Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers must assess:
• Originality
• Contribution to the field
• Technical quality
• Clarity of presentation
• Depth of research

Review Report Requirements
Reports must be:
• Precise, objective, and constructive.
• Supported by evidence-based arguments.

Recommendation Options
Reviewers may recommend:
• Accept
• Minor revisions required
• Major revisions required
• Reject