POLICY AND INFORMATION
Peer Review Policy
1. General Overview of the Peer Review Process
In principle, submitted manuscripts will be evaluated by reviewers appointed by the editorial board. Initially, the Editor-in-Chief will review all manuscripts to assess language appropriateness, alignment with the journal’s scope, and adherence to the author guidelines. If the manuscript is deemed suitable, it will be forwarded to a team of two reviewers. However, if the manuscript does not meet the initial criteria, it will be returned to the author.
The team of two reviewers will assess the manuscript through a Blind Review process, in which the reviewers are not informed of the author’s identity. The review criteria include originality, significance, and writing quality. The editorial board holds the authority to accept or reject a manuscript or to request a revised version from the author.
Plagiarism screening is conducted using the TURNITIN software. The article will be automatically rejected if the plagiarism level exceeds 20% (excluding the bibliography).
2. Specific Overview of the Peer Review Process
Reviewers are expected to provide detailed and constructive comments, which will serve as the basis for editorial decisions regarding accepting or rejecting a submitted article. The reviewer should consider the following aspects:
a. Originality and Significance
Reviewers are expected to evaluate the originality of the findings presented in the article. Additionally, they should assess whether the findings hold significant value or impact within the scientific community. If similar work is found, reviewers may suggest improvements or offer critiques on how the research is presented.
b. Novelty of Theoretical Approach and Problem Discussion
Reviewers should assess the novelty of the theoretical framework and how the authors discuss research outcomes to address the problem. This aspect is typically reflected in the introduction, where the urgency and rationale for the research are outlined.
c. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Applied Methodology
Reviewers are encouraged to assess the research methods used critically. Statistical analyses or other analytical techniques influencing result interpretation should be thoroughly evaluated to enhance the article’s overall quality.
d. Reliability of Research Results and Conclusions
Reviewers should evaluate the reliability of the research outcomes and the conclusions drawn. This reliability is reflected in the thoroughness of the analysis and the adequacy of the data presented.
e. Format Consistency with Submission Guidelines
Compliance with the journal’s formatting guidelines facilitates the editorial and layout processes. Many authors tend to overlook these requirements and submit partially formatted manuscripts. While reviewers may consider this aspect, the primary focus should remain on the abovementioned content and criteria.
f. Suggestions and Feedback
Suppose errors or deficiencies are identified in the article. In that case, reviewers are expected to point out which sections need improvement and provide guidance on how to enhance the quality of the manuscript.
