Peer Review Process

All submissions to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review to warrant the quality of manuscripts that will be finally published. The editors have the right not to have a manuscript undergo review if the manuscript: (a) mainly addresses a subject outside the aim and scope of our journal, (b) contains technical drawbacks, and (c) has no salience and has been written in poor English.

The review consists of the following steps:

1. In the first stage, an internal staff checks the format and style of the manuscript to assure that it is suitable to go through the normal peer-review process. If the authors have not considered the guides, the manuscript will be sent back to the authors for compatibility.
2. Submissions are then assigned to an Editor for evaluation.
3. The Editor decides whether reviews from additional experts are needed to evaluate the manuscript. The majority of submissions are evaluated by two external reviewers, but it is up to the Editor to determine the number of reviews.
4. After evaluation, the Editor chooses between the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

If the decision is Minor Revision or Major Revision, authors usually have 15 days to resubmit the revised manuscript. Authors may contact the email address if they require an extension.  Upon resubmission, the Editor may choose to send the manuscript back to external reviewers or may make a decision based on personal expertise. Finally, Managing Editor receives the reviewers’ comments and sends them along with a decision letter to the corresponding author. The final decision on each manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Duties of Editors:

1. Publication Decisions

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal fulfill the conditions of publication after peer review(s) and revision(s). The decisions are based on the journal’s policies and constrained by certain considerations that are likely to create legal issues such as plagiarism, libel, and copyright infringement. 

2. Fair Play

The editor examines manuscripts irrespective of gender, race, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, religious belief, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Duties of Reviewers:

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making decisions about a submitted manuscript and may also aid the author in enhancing the manuscript through feedback and revisions.

2. Promptness

If a reviewer is unable to review a manuscript or knows that he/she cannot review the manuscript within the specified time limit, he/she should notify the journal.

3. Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts must be regarded as confidential. They must not be revealed to or discussed with others unless the editor provides permission.

The peer-review process is shown diagrammatically as follows: