Peer Review Policy

Every paper that is submitted goes through a double-blind, peer-reviewed process where the identity of the reviewers and authors are kept a secret from one another. Peer review procedures are used to uphold the journal's quality standards, enhance output, and establish credibility. The editor-in-chief and editors, or the editorial board, use the peer review process to determine whether to accept, reject, or consider submissions acceptable with minor or major adjustments. Double-blind peer review aims to minimize publication bias and protect identities by evaluating submitted papers only on the basis of their scientific merit.

A double-blind peer review methodology means that the reviewers are not given the author's name or affiliation, and the author and other reviewers of the paper are never given the reviewers' name or any other information.

We require the reviewers to be highly knowledgeable in their respective fields of expertise and to have produced a significant number of peer-reviewed articles in order to guarantee the quality of the publications.

The editorial board, editors, and editor-in-chief are in charge of choosing reviewers, in that order.

Peer Review Process

Manuscript Submission: Through the online system, manuscripts must be prepared in accordance with the author guidelines.

Preliminary Review: The manuscript is subjected to a preliminary technical and editorial review following submission to make sure it adheres to the journal's instructions to authors.

PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL CHECK (EDITORIAL SELECTION)

At this step the technical preparation of the submission is checked, including the language level, referencing/formatting and authenticity using plagiarism software. In addition, the Author Statement is required! Articles submitted will not be considered without Author Statement (completed, signed with a blue pen, scanned and uploaded as a supplementary file in the submission process) see Submission Preparation Checklist. After the peer review process, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, the Author Statement should be sent to us, as original, by regular postal mail.

Preliminary Editorial Check

Before forwarding the manuscript for an in-depth review, the Editorial Board checks if the manuscript is within the scope of the journal, if it contains a high level of originality and if it follows overall scientific requirements of the journal. Specifically, this preliminary selection considers factors such as the preparation of the paper according to the Author Guidelines; objective formulation in a clear and coherent manner; theoretical basis; literature review; analysis of data using appropriate methods; discussion of results in relation to scientific literature; contribution to the scientific area; quality of tables and figures; originality and consistency of the research etc.

Manuscript rejected at editorial level If a manuscript does not meet the requirements of the journal (scope, originality, does not follow Author Guidelines, etc.) it will not be forwarded to an in-depth review.

The manuscript can be rejected if:

 

  • The journal's scope is different to the topic of the submitted paper
  • Presentation of a manuscript does not follow the journal's instructions for authors
  • The article contains significant swathes of plagiarized content
  • The editor judges that their audience might not be interested in this manuscript
  • The topic of the paper is too specialized/niche (not even as the niche of the journal)
  • The research is poor. The results presented are too preliminary or superficial
  • Failure to relate findings / (results and discussion) /conclusions to aims / theory / literature
  • The quality of English language use is poor

Manuscript accepted for peer review If the manuscript meets the journal's requirements (both at technical and editorial level), it is forwarded to peer-review.

Manuscript Enters In-Depth Review Process

Editor selects reviewers - Reviewers are selected on the basis of a number of factors such as expertise in the area of research, specific recommendations, availability, previous experience and prior history of providing timely and quality feedback to authors. Invitations to review a manuscript are confidential. Reviewers are asked to examine and assess the manuscript, its research design, methodology, validity, accuracy, originality and significance of findings. Editorial board members and reviewers must treat the review process as strictly confidential, and not discuss the manuscript with anyone not directly involved in the review.

Peer review results - After the reviewers complete their review reports, the Editor-in-Chief collects and compiles their reports and makes the final decision about the content of the review report which will be sent to the authors.

Generally, the decision could be as follow:

  • Manuscript accepted for publication (very rare, "perfect paper"; maybe happens for invited articles)
  • Manuscript accepted with revisions (minor or major revisions)
  • Manuscript rejected

Manuscript Rejected

If the review reports deem the manuscript to be unacceptable, the Editor makes the final decision based on the collected review results and the suggestion of the Associate Editor. Authors are informed that their manuscript will not be published in the journal based on unfavorable reviewers' comments and the decision of the Editor-in-Chief.

Manuscript Accepted For Publication

If reviewers suggest acceptance of the article, the Editor-in-Chief makes his final decision based on these suggestions. Authors are informed about the acceptance of their article and that their article will be forwarded to the publishing process (‘Copy-editing’, ‘Layout’, ‘Proofreading’ – see below; more information on ‘OJS Editorial and Publishing Process‘).

Manuscript Accepted With Revisions

Authors are required to make minor/major corrections to their manuscript based on reviewers comments they have received, in order to make it suitable for publication. (Revised submissions go through the same initial steps outlined above for new submissions before they can be reassigned to original Reviewers.)

Manuscript sent back to the author(s) for revision - Authors should address the referee’s comments and send their responses in a separate document (Response to reviewers). Once the corrections have been made, authors need to send (re-submit) their manuscript as well as the "Response to reviewers".

Reviewers check the revised manuscript - Revised manuscript, along with "Response to reviewers", is forwarded to original reviewers who are then asked to review the manuscript again, for their final decision.

Editor confirms final decision - Review reports are sent to authors.