Peer Review Procedure
The journal applies an independent, objective, and confidential peer review process in accordance with international publication ethics standards and COPE recommendations. The purpose of peer review is to ensure high scientific quality, reliability, and academic integrity of published materials.
- Type of Peer Review
The journal uses a double-blind peer review system, under which authors do not know the identity of the reviewers and reviewers do not know the identity of the authors. This approach ensures impartial evaluation and minimizes potential conflicts of interest.
If necessary, the Editorial Board may conduct additional expert review or involve external specialists in the relevant field.
- Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, publication record, research expertise in the relevant field, and absence of conflicts of interest related to the manuscript.
Peer review is conducted by scholars holding an academic degree or having confirmed research experience. Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflict of interest and decline the review if such a conflict exists.
- Review Process and Timeframes
After initial editorial screening (compliance with the journal’s scope, formatting requirements, and plagiarism check), the manuscript is sent to at least two independent reviewers.
The standard review period is typically 2 to 4 weeks. If necessary, the review period may be extended upon agreement with the Editorial Office.
- Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers assess the manuscript according to the following criteria:
– scientific novelty and relevance of the research;
– theoretical and methodological soundness;
– reliability and appropriateness of the methods and data used;
– logical structure and validity of conclusions;
– compliance with ethical standards;
– relevance to the journal’s scope and aims.
- Documentation
Reviews are submitted in written form (through the electronic editorial system or via email) and include comments, recommendations for revision, and an overall recommendation:
– accept without revision;
– accept with minor revisions;
– accept with major revisions;
– reject.
All peer review materials are retained by the Editorial Office in accordance with the journal’s confidentiality policy.
- Editorial Decision
The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editorial Board based on the reviewers’ reports and the editorial assessment. If revisions are required, the author receives anonymized reviewer comments and submits a revised version within the specified timeframe.
The Editorial Board ensures transparency of the process, non-discrimination, and the absence of financial or other non-scientific influence on editorial decisions.
