Initial Submission and Technical Screening

1. The author submits the manuscript through the journal's online submission system.
2. The Editorial Team conducts an initial technical examination to assess completeness, formatting, authorship information, references, declarations, and compliance with the journal's submission guidelines.
3. Each manuscript is screened using Turnitin or another similarity-detection system approved by the journal.
4. Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's technical requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before further evaluation.

Editorial Assessment

1. Following the technical screening, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor evaluates the manuscript's suitability for the journal.
2. The editorial assessment considers the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, scholarly contribution, methodological quality, clarity, and compliance with publication ethics.
3. The editor may reject a manuscript without external review when it is outside the journal's scope, does not meet minimum academic standards, contains serious ethical concerns, or does not comply with the journal's policies.
4. Manuscripts considered suitable for further evaluation are assigned to a handling editor for the peer-review process.

Reviewer Assignment

1. The handling editor identifies and invites at least two reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject area.
2. Reviewers must be independent and must not have conflicts of interest involving the authors, their institutions, the research, or the manuscript.
3. Because peer review is a voluntary scholarly service, the review process may require time. The editor will monitor the process and send reminders when reviewers do not respond within the expected period.
4. During this stage, the manuscript status in the submission system may appear as Under Review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal applies double-blind peer review. Authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities, and reviewers are not informed of the authors' identities. Authors must remove identifying information from the anonymized manuscript file before submission.

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on criteria that may include:

• relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
• originality and scholarly significance;
• clarity of the research objectives;
• appropriateness of the research methodology;
• validity of the analysis and conclusions;
• quality and relevance of the references;
• organization, readability, and language quality;
• compliance with research and publication ethics.

Completion of Reviews

Once the editor has received the required number of reviewer reports, the manuscript may be marked as having completed the required reviews in the journal's submission system. The editor evaluates the reports and determines whether additional review, revision, or an editorial decision is required.

The editor may invite an additional reviewer when the initial reports are incomplete, contradictory, outside the relevant area of expertise, or insufficient to support a fair editorial decision.

Editorial Decision

The editor considers the reviewers' recommendations together with the journal's editorial standards and the editor's independent academic assessment. The final decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor.

The possible editorial decisions are:

1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted without substantive revision and proceeds to copyediting and production.
2. Minor Revision: The manuscript may be accepted after the authors make limited corrections within the specified period.
3. Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial changes and may undergo another round of review after revision.
4. Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires extensive revision and must be resubmitted for a new round of editorial assessment and peer review.
5. Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected and will not proceed to publication.

Revision Process

1. Authors receive the editorial decision and anonymized reviewer comments through the journal's submission system.
2. Authors must revise the manuscript within the period specified by the editor.
3. A revised manuscript must be accompanied by a detailed response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.
4. Authors should clearly indicate changes made to the manuscript or explain, with appropriate justification, why a particular recommendation was not followed.
5. The revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated directly by the editor, depending on the extent of the revisions.
6. An invitation to revise and resubmit does not guarantee acceptance.

Peer-Review Rounds

The stages from initial submission, technical screening, editorial assessment, reviewer evaluation, and the first editorial decision constitute one peer-review round.

Additional review rounds may be conducted when major revisions are required or when the editor determines that further expert assessment is necessary. The process continues until the manuscript is accepted, declined, or withdrawn.

Final Acceptance and Publication

1. A manuscript is accepted only after the editor is satisfied that the authors have adequately addressed the editorial and reviewer comments.
2. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout editing, metadata verification, proofreading, and publication preparation.
3. Authors may be asked to review the final galley proof and identify production errors before publication.
4. Changes requested during proofreading should normally be limited to typographical, formatting, metadata, or production-related corrections.
5. The final publication schedule is determined by the Editorial Team.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, correspondence, and related materials as confidential. Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect the independence or impartiality of the review process.

Individuals with a relevant conflict of interest must decline or be removed from handling the manuscript.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial interests, institutional relationships, the authors' identity or affiliation, or other considerations unrelated to the manuscript's academic merit and compliance with journal policies.