ISSN 2522-9400 (Online)
All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. The journal uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. Two reviewers from outside and one editor from the journal typically involve in reviewing a submission.
When a manuscript is submitted, the editor reviews it to see whether it is suitable for formal review. Without going through the regular peer review process, manuscripts containing plagiarism, substantial scientific or technical errors, or a lack of a relevant message are rejected. Manuscripts that do not fall within the scope of the Journal may also be rejected at this stage.
Manuscripts that fulfill the basic requirements will be sent to at least two specialists for evaluation. The reviewers' reports are based on the following parameters:
- Does the article bring new scientific revelations and theoretical approaches?
- Is the article methodologically adequate?
- Is the article grammatically adequate?
- Is the structure of the article adequate (introduction, study, conclusion …)?
- Is the title of the article adequate?
- Are the abstract and key words adequate?
The reviewers fill out the form indicating the compliance of the material with the above criteria and express their opinion regarding the publication of the article:
- Publishable without corrections;
- Publishable with minor corrections;
- Publishable with substantial corrections;
- Not publishable.
After receiving comments from the reviewers, the editorial board members have the authority to make the ultimate decision on publishing. The corresponding author will be notified of the acceptance, rejection, or amendment of the manuscript.
If the author desires to appeal a peer review decision, he or she should write to the editor and discuss the problem. Appeals will be successful only if the reviews were insufficient or unjust. If this is the case, the manuscript will be submitted to new reviewers who have agreed to re-review it.
During the submission and review process, the corresponding author (or co-author designated) will act as the primary correspondent with the editorial office on behalf of all co-authors.
Accepted articles will be formatted and copy-edited prior to publication. Page proofs will be given to the corresponding author and must be returned within three days, with or without corrections.
Review time: up to 4 weeks.
Publication time: 4-8 weeks.