The journal uses independent peer review to assess the quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, with due regard to confidentiality and competing interests.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial team checks whether a submission fits the journal’s scope and a section currently open for submissions, meets the Author Guidelines, and satisfies initial requirements for scholarly quality, originality, and research ethics. A manuscript may be declined before external review, with the main reasons communicated to the corresponding author.

2. Double-Anonymous Peer Review

The journal applies double-anonymous peer review wherever practicable: author identities are not disclosed to reviewers, and reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors. Authors must provide an anonymized manuscript and a separate title page containing author information. The handling editor checks the files selected for review before making them available to reviewers.

3. Reviewer Selection and Assessment Criteria

Manuscripts passing initial screening are assessed by at least two independent subject specialists who are not members of the editorial board and have no institutional relationship, competing interest, or research collaboration with the authors that could compromise their independence.

Reviewers assess originality, significance, clarity of objectives and scholarly argument, methodological suitability, validity of analysis and conclusions, appropriate referencing, presentation, and ethical standards. Statistical analysis is assessed where applicable to the study.

A third reviewer may be consulted when reports differ substantially or further assessment is needed.

4. Editorial Decisions and Revisions

The Editor-in-Chief, or an authorized independent editor where a conflict exists, decides whether to accept, request minor or major revisions, or reject the manuscript, considering the reports and authors’ responses. An individual reviewer’s recommendation does not constitute a final publication decision.

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response. The editor specifies the revision deadline and may seek further external review. Completing revisions does not guarantee acceptance.

5. Competing Interests and Independent Handling

Editors and reviewers must disclose interests that could influence, or appear to influence, their assessment and withdraw where a material conflict exists.

Submissions authored by editorial board members are handled by an independent editor. The author concerned must not participate in reviewer selection, management of the review, or the publication decision for their own manuscript.

6. Confidentiality and External Tools

Manuscripts, review reports, and related correspondence are confidential and accessible only to those whose duties require access. Comments intended for authors are shared with appropriate attention to confidentiality and anonymity.

Editors and reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or review materials to external tools or services, including artificial intelligence tools, without approved authorization that safeguards confidentiality and the rights of content owners. Reviewers remain responsible for their scholarly assessments.

7. Deadlines

The default period for responding to a review invitation is one week, and the default review completion period is three weeks. Actual due dates are specified in each invitation and may be adjusted with the editor’s approval.

These are operational review deadlines, not a guarantee that a final editorial decision will be issued within a specified period.

8. Appeals

The corresponding author may submit a reasoned appeal within thirty days of notification of the decision, based on a procedural failure, competing interest, or material error in handling the manuscript. Appeals must be submitted through the journal’s published official contact channels.

An independent editorial party who did not participate in the original decision reviews the appeal, and the author receives a written outcome.

9. Fees and Application of the Policy

Payment of any approved publication fees, where applicable, must not influence reviewer selection or the scholarly decision.

This policy applies to new submissions, while submissions already in progress remain subject to the policies and conditions applicable when they were submitted.

For detailed manuscript preparation and submission requirements, please consult the Author Guidelines.