Peer Review Process

1. Initial Screening

Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the Editor in Chief or Managing Editor to assess its relevance to the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with author guidelines, and plagiarism screening. Manuscripts that do not meet the initial requirements may be rejected or returned to the authors for revision.

2. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two (2) independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s topic. Reviewers are selected based on academic competence and the absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Double-Blind Review

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript objectively by considering originality, methodology, quality of analysis, relevance of discussion, and scholarly contribution. Reviewers provide recommendations such as: accept without revision, minor revision, major revision, or reject.

4. Editorial Decision

Editors consider all reviewer comments to make the final decision. In cases of significant disagreement between reviewers, the editor may appoint an additional reviewer or make an editorial decision based on academic judgment.

5. Author Revision

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts according to reviewer comments and submit the revised version along with a response to reviewers through OJS within the specified timeframe.

6. Editing and Publication

Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading before being published online according to the journal’s publication schedule.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all manuscript-related information and avoid any conflicts of interest during the review process.

Estimated Review Timeline

English

• Initial screening: 1–2 weeks
• Peer review process: 3–4 weeks
• Author revision: 2–4 weeks