Peer-Review Process
Our double-blind peer-review process ensures scholarly rigor, fairness, and integrity for every published work.
1. Submission & Initial Screening
Authors submit their manuscript with required metadata and files. The editorial office performs an initial screening for scope, completeness, and plagiarism before assigning it to an editor.
2. Reviewer Assignment
The editor assigns qualified peer reviewers based on expertise. Reviewer identities remain confidential (double-blind review process).
3. Peer Review
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and submit structured feedback with recommendations: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. Review deadlines are tracked.
4. Revisions
If revisions are required, the author receives revision notes and resubmits a revised version. The editor and reviewers assess the changes before a final decision.
5. Editorial Decision
The editor makes a final decision: accept, reject, or request further revision. Accepted manuscripts move to copyediting and publication scheduling.
6. Publication
An editor publishes the accepted work. Only then is it assigned 'published' status, assigned a permanent URL, and made publicly available. The full audit trail is preserved.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewer identities and unpublished manuscript contents are kept strictly confidential. Only editors and authorized administrative staff can access reviewer assignments and review notes. Authors cannot see who reviewed their work, and reviewers cannot see other reviewers' identities.