Review Principles

Each submitted manuscript is first screened by the editor to ensure its relevance to the journal scope, formatting completeness, originality, and compliance with publication ethics. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be returned to the authors before entering the review stage.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to reviewers with expertise relevant to the article. Reviewers objectively evaluate novelty, clarity of objectives, methodological strength, quality of analysis, discussion accuracy, scholarly contribution, and reference relevance.

Peer Review Stages

1. Authors submit manuscripts through the OJS system.
2. The editor conducts an initial screening of format, completeness, and scope relevance.
3. Eligible manuscripts are sent to reviewers using a double-blind peer review mechanism.
4. Reviewers provide recommendations: accepted, minor revision, major revision, or rejected.
5. The editor communicates the review results to the authors.
6. Authors revise the manuscript based on reviewer and editor comments.
7. The editor reviews the revised manuscript before making the final publication decision.

Editorial Decision

The final decision on a manuscript is made by the editor by considering reviewer recommendations, article quality, revision adequacy, and compliance with scholarly publication standards. The editor may request additional revisions when the manuscript still requires improvement before publication.