The peer review process is as follows:
- Authors submit the manuscript through the Journal's manuscript submission system.
- All manuscripts submitted to this Journal undergo an initial desk evaluation process by Editorial staff to ensure compliance with the Journal's focus and scope, author guidelines, and the manuscript's authenticity.
- To check the manuscript's authenticity, this Journal uses Grammarly for plagiarism screening with a maximum similarity of 20% for the whole manuscript and 4% for each source.
- After passing the initial review, a manuscript undergoes a double anonymous peer-review process by at least two national or international Academic Reviewers who are experts in relevant fields. The reviewers provide scientific comments to improve the scientific merit or novelty appropriate to the Journal's focus and scope.
- The authors revise the manuscript according to the Reviewer's comments.
- The Editors will decide on the article's acceptance according to the reviewers' comments. The following are the common decisions:
- accept as is: The manuscript can be accepted as it is, because both the substance and writing are good (highly unlikely)
- accept with minor revision: The manuscript needs minor revisions on substance or writing. Manuscripts can be published without a second round of review.
- major revision: The manuscript requires major revision on substance or writing. After revision, it goes to the second round of review.
- reject: The manuscript is rejected for not meeting publishing requirements.
- The Editor in Chief decides the article's publication by considering the acceptance dates and thematic issues.
- All notifications regarding the Editor's decision and the Reviewer's comments are posted on the manuscript's submission system and sent to the author's registered email address. The authors must provide an active email address and promptly respond to editorial and review comments. If no response is received after three editorial reminders, the manuscripts will be rejected.