Peer Review Process

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo an initial evaluation for relevance, clarity, originality, and alignment with the journal's scope. Manuscripts that meet these criteria will move forward to peer review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal will adopt a double-blind review system where neither authors nor reviewers know each other's identities. This will ensure unbiased assessment driven by academic merit and methodological soundness.

3. Reviewer Selection and Expertise

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the specific topic, methodology, and disciplinary domain of the manuscript. Each submission will be assigned to at least two reviewers.

4. Review Timelines

The journal aims for a streamlined review cycle, typically involving:

• –1 to 2 weeks for initial editorial screening
• –2 to 3 weeks for the review process
• –1 to 2 weeks for revisions

5. Revision and Resubmission

Authors receive consolidated feedback and may be invited to revise their manuscripts. Revised submissions will be reviewed again by the editorial team and, when necessary, by the original reviewers.

6. Final Decision and Acceptance

The Editor-in-Chief, along with Associate Editors, will make the final publication decision based on reviewer feedback, revisions, and overall alignment with the journal's standards.

7. Ethical Review Practices

The journal follows COPE guidelines, uphold ethical standards in human-subject research, and ensure academic integrity through plagiarism checks.