Peer Review Process

Initial Screening: The Chief Editor or a member of the editorial team (sometimes referred to as the Desk Editor) conducts a preliminary examination of the article. This screening includes checking for alignment with the journal's scope, adherence to author guidelines, and a plagiarism check using Turnitin. Similarity exceeding 20% in the main article is not permitted.
Assignment to Section Editor: If the article passes the initial screening, the Chief Editor will then assign the article to a Section Editor based on subject matter expertise. The Section Editor is responsible for managing the peer review process for the article.
Reviewer Selection: The Section Editor selects and invites reviewers who are experts in the article's subject area. The number of reviewers typically ranges from two to three, depending on the journal's policy.
Review Process: Reviewers evaluate the article and provide their recommendations to the Section Editor, which includes suggestions for improvement, questions for the author(s), and a final recommendation (e.g., accept, revise, or reject).
Editorial Decision: Based on feedback from the reviewers, the Section Editor makes an editorial decision about the article and communicates this to the Chief Editor. The Chief Editor then reviews these recommendations and makes the final decision regarding the article's status.
Communication with Authors: The Chief Editor or Section Editor then informs the author(s) about the decision and the next steps, which may include revisions or steps towards publication.

Throughout this entire process, the Chief Editor plays a key role in ensuring the integrity of the editorial process, setting quality standards, and maintaining the scientific quality of the journal.

Publication Timeline:

Normal evaluation time: Four to six months.