Peer Review Process

This journal employs a rigorous, multi-stage peer review system designed to ensure the quality and scholarly suitability of all published manuscripts.

I. Initial Assessment and Desk Review

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation for adherence to the journal's submission guidelines and scope. Submissions failing to meet these preliminary requirements will be returned to the author for necessary revisions. The journal reserves the right to desk reject (reject without external peer review) manuscripts deemed unsuitable or out of scope at this stage.

II. Review Methodology: Double-Anonymized

The journal strictly adheres to a double-anonymized review policy. This protocol ensures complete mutual concealment of identities: the authors' identities are hidden from the reviewers, and the reviewers' identities are hidden from the authors. Reviewers communicate their assessments and recommendations exclusively through the editorial team (Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor/Editorial Assistant). The journal maintains full confidentiality, as no information regarding the peer review process (including reviewer comments or identity) is made public alongside the final published article.

III. Review Requirements and Decision

  • Standard Review: A minimum of three independent peer reviews is generally required before a manuscript can receive a decision of "Revise" or "Accept."

  • Exceptions: Certain manuscript types, such as Editorials and Viewpoints, may be accepted without requiring three independent reviews. A third reviewer may be consulted if additional expertise is necessary.

  • Final Authority: Reviewers provide comments to the author and recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and Associate Editors/Editorial Assistant, who retain the final decision-making authority on all submissions, including those designated for special issues or collections.

  • Reviewer Assignment: To uphold the integrity of the process, the journal assigns reviewers and cannot accept author recommendations for reviewers.

IV. Ethical Policy for Editorial Submissions

To maintain objectivity and prevent conflicts of interest, any manuscript submitted by an Editor or Editorial Board member will have its peer review process managed by alternative, non-submitting members of the Board. The submitting Editor or Board member will be strictly excluded from the decision-making process for their own manuscript.