About the Journal

Peer Review Process

Manuscript evaluation process and publication criteria.

Peer Review Process

  1. Upon receipt of a manuscript, the editorial office will notify the corresponding author that the manuscript has been received and sent for further processing. After submission, the Editor-in-Chief evaluates each manuscript to determine whether it meets the basic criteria for further consideration.

    Manuscripts that do not meet the main criteria (journal scope, compliance with the Guidelines for Authors, publication priority) are rejected without peer review. If the Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editor determines that the manuscript does not meet the minimum quality standards required for the standard review process, or that its topic falls outside the journal’s scope, the manuscript will be rejected without further consideration.

    Before being sent to reviewers, the manuscript undergoes plagiarism screening.

  2. This journal uses a double-blind peer review process, meaning that authors do not know the identity of reviewers, and reviewers do not know the identity of authors.

    Therefore, authors should avoid including any identifying information after the title page. If such information is necessary for any reason, authors are requested to notify the editorial office so that the content can be anonymized before being sent to reviewers.

  3. If the manuscript is suitable and complies with the Guidelines for Authors, it is sent to two reviewers. Reviewers provide reports with one of the following recommendations:
    • accept without revisions
    • accept after minor or major revisions
    • reject
  4. After receiving all reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with members of the Editorial Board, makes one of the following decisions:
    • accept without changes
    • accept after revisions
    • reject

    Authors are required to submit a detailed response letter in which each reviewer comment is quoted verbatim, followed by a precise and comprehensive response.

    Authors must clearly indicate all changes made to the manuscript and ensure that all revisions are visibly marked (e.g., highlighted in yellow) in the revised version.

    The response letter should be prepared in a format suitable for forwarding to reviewers without prior editorial modification.