The journal will employ the double-blind peer review process, where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the review process. All research articles will be submitted to two anonymous subject experts.
The journal follows ethical guidelines by |C|O|P|E|
Every manuscript submitted for publication is read at least by the editor, for an initial review. If the paper agrees with editorial policies and with a minimum quality level, is sent to two subject expert reviewers. Editor will provide a list of external relevant academics with expertise in the field and will choose two reviewers from this list.
The reviewers will not know the author’s identity, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before review. Reviewers’ comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author is made anonymous.
Peer reviewers will have four possible options for each article:
- Accept without revision.
- Accept with minor amendments.
- Support publication with major revisions and likely re-review.
In cases where there is strong disagreement either among peer reviewers, further expert advice may be sought.
Based on the reviewers’ comments, the Editor will make a final decision on the acceptability of the manuscript, and communicates to the authors the decision, along with reviewers’ reports. Whether significant revisions are proposed, acceptance is dependent on whether the author can deal with those satisfactorily.