Editorial Procedures and Peer Review

  1. Initial Submission Check

Upon receipt of a manuscript, the editorial office conducts a technical pre-check to ensure the submission complies with the journal’s basic requirements, including:

  • Manuscript formatting (structure, reference style, language clarity)
  • Completeness of required sections (e.g., abstract, keywords, affiliations)
  • Ethical compliance (e.g., plagiarism screening, conflicts of interest declaration)
  • Relevance to the journal's scope

Submissions that do not meet the minimum standards may be returned to the authors for revision prior to peer review.

  1. Editorial Evaluation

Once the submission passes the technical pre-check, it is evaluated by an Editor-in-Chief or a designated Subject Editor. At this stage, the editor assesses:

  • The manuscript’s novelty and scientific merit
  • Alignment with the journal’s aims and scope
  • Suitability for peer review

Manuscripts that are deemed out of scope or of insufficient quality may be desk-rejected without external review.

  1. Peer Review Process

Submissions that pass editorial evaluation are sent for double-blind peer review, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. The standard process includes:

  • Assignment of at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise
  • Reviewers are requested to provide their evaluations within 2–4 weeks
  • Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, methodology, clarity, and significance
  • Reviewers make a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject

The editorial team may invite additional reviewers if needed to ensure a fair and comprehensive assessment.

  1. Editorial Decision and Revisions

Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the handling editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted with no or minor revisions
  • Minor Revision: Authors are requested to revise the manuscript and respond to reviewer comments
  • Major Revision: Substantial changes are required before further consideration
  • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal

Authors are typically given 2–4 weeks to submit revised manuscripts. All revisions must be accompanied by a point-by-point response letter addressing each comment.

In cases of major revision, the revised manuscript may be sent for a second round of peer review.

  1. Final Decision and Acceptance

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or handling editor based on:

  • Revised manuscript quality
  • Author responses to reviewer comments
  • Final reviewer feedback (if applicable)

Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting, typesetting, and proofing prior to publication.

  1. Author Appeals

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit a formal appeal to the editorial office. Appeals should include:

  • A detailed rebuttal letter addressing the decision
  • Justification and evidence supporting reconsideration
  • A revised version of the manuscript (if applicable)

Appeals are reviewed by a senior editor or the Editor-in-Chief, and may involve consultation with additional reviewers or editorial board members. The editorial decision following an appeal is final.