How manuscripts are screened, reviewed, and decided.

Editorial Screening

• Each submission is first checked for scope, basic completeness, and adherence to journal requirements.
• Submissions that fall clearly outside the journal's scope or fail basic standards may be returned without external review.

Double-Blind Review

The journal describes its process as double-blind peer review. Author and reviewer identities are not intended to be disclosed to one another during the review stage.

• Reviewers are selected for subject relevance and academic competence.
• The journal ordinarily seeks at least two independent reviewers for a manuscript that proceeds to full peer review.
• Reviewers are invited to evaluate originality, argument, method, references, and contribution to the field.
• Review recommendations may include acceptance, revision, resubmission, or rejection.

Editorial Decision

• The editorial board and review committee consider the reviewer feedback before issuing a final decision.
• Authors may be asked to revise the manuscript to address reviewer observations.
• Acceptance is confirmed only after the editorial process is complete and required revisions are satisfactorily addressed.

Confidentiality and Conduct

• Manuscripts under review should not be shared or used for personal advantage by reviewers.
• Authors should not attempt to influence reviewers or editorial decisions through improper contact.
• The journal may discontinue review when ethical concerns, authorship disputes, or major integrity issues arise.

Typical Review Stages

• Submission receipt and editorial screening.
• Reviewer invitation and double-blind assessment.
• Editorial communication of revision, acceptance, resubmission, or rejection.
• Final issue placement and online publication after editorial completion.