MANUSCRIPT PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

First Evaluation

The Technical Editor collects manuscript submissions, reviewing only those that comply with the journal’s author guidelines. Eligible submissions are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief, who may consult the Associate Editors. The manuscript is then either accepted for peer review or rejected. The primary goal at this stage is to ensure the submission meets scholarly standards. Manuscripts may undergo plagiarism checks and can be rejected for the following reasons:

1. Misalignment with the journal’s scope

2. Non-compliance with submission guidelines

3. Formatting, orthographic, or syntactical errors

4. Plagiarism or excessive content similarity with other sources

5. Lack of relevance to contemporary scientific issues

6. Use of outdated or insufficiently innovative theoretical approaches

7. Limited methodology, lack of broader interpretation, or insufficient methodological detail

Manuscripts deemed suitable for peer review proceed to PEER REVIEW for further evaluation by subject-matter experts.

Peer Review

The Editor-in-Chief/one of the Associate Editors assigns at least two field experts to review each manuscript using a double-blind review process. Reviewers assess the submission based on rigor, coherence, engagement with existing research, and overall contribution to the field, with a focus on methodology, analysis, and interpretation. Reviewers provide feedback on:

1. Novelty and originality

2. Significance within the field

3. Clarity and structure

4. Methodological rigor

5. Evidence supporting claims

6. Linguistic and stylistic quality

7. Relevance and quality of figures

8. Overall scholarly contribution

If a manuscript falls short of the journal’s standards, reviewers provide constructive criticism for improvement. Authors may be invited to revise and resubmit their work. After all reviews are considered, the Editor-in-Chief/one of the Associate Editors sends a decision letter with one of the following outcomes:

1. Acceptance without revision

2. Minor revision

3. Major revision

4. Rejection

Final Evaluation

If revisions are required, authors should submit their revised manuscript promptly. The Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors evaluates the revisions and may request further modifications if necessary. After the final review, the Editor-in-Chief makes the ultimate decision:

A. Acceptance

or

B. Rejection