- The Editorial Team reserves the right to reject an article without consulting the Reviewers, if it is found to be unsuitable for the Journal based on an internal evaluation carried out by a member of the Editorial Team. This can happen if the article does not meet either the minimum quality standards or the guidelines outlined in the PUBLISHING GUIDELINES.
- The articles are evaluated by two independent Reviewers who are experts in the field related to the subject of the article. The reviewers should have notable research accomplishments in the area of the article. The reviewers are not part of the Journal's Editorial Team and are not associated with the institution that the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal is affiliated with.
- The review process used for articles is a double-blind model, in which the identities of the Author and Reviewers are not revealed to each other (double-blind review process).
- Reviews must be written and submitted using the REVIEWER'S EVALUATION FORM. They should be objective and avoid personal criticism of the Author. Reviewers are expected to provide clear, constructive, and detailed feedback that allows the Author to address any issues raised in the review. The review should conclude with a clear recommendation on whether the article should be published as is, after revisions, after further research, or if it should not be accepted for publication.
- In the case of articles that need corrections, the Reviewers may, at the request of the editor, review the revised version of the article to determine if the corrections are satisfactory or not.
- If two reviews of the same article are in contradiction, the Editorial Team may ask a third expert to review the article or refrain from publishing it. The Editor makes the decision after considering all reviews.
- Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the Author and inform the Editorial Team of any suspected unethical behaviour on the part of the Author. Reviewers should also bring to the attention of the Editorial Team any significant similarities or overlaps between the reviewed article and any other previously published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
- If a selected Reviewer feels unqualified to provide an objective review or cannot complete the review within two months from the date of assignment, they should immediately inform the Editorial Team and withdraw from the review process.
- The whole content of each reviewed article is subject to the principle of confidentiality.