Peer Review Policy

Step 1: Initial Editorial Screening

Every submission is first reviewed by the editorial team to assess: Relevance to the journal’s scope, Adherence to submission guidelines, Originality and scholarly merit and Language quality and formatting. Submissions that do not meet basic criteria may be returned to the author for revision or rejected without external review.

Step 2: Plagiarism and AI Content Screening

All manuscripts are screened using Turnitin to detect plagiarism. Submissions with similarity above 15% (excluding references and commonly used phrases) are returned or rejected. Manuscripts are also checked for excessive AI-generated content using QuillBot AI detection tools, with a 0% tolerance for uncredited AI-generated work.

Step 3: Double-Blind Peer Review

Suitable manuscripts are anonymized and sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process. Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on: Originality and significance of contribution, Theoretical and methodological soundness, Clarity of argument and structure, Engagement with relevant literature, and Ethical standards of research and citation.

Review Timeline: The typical review process takes 3 to 6 months.  

Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial board will make one of the following decisions: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Revised submissions may be re-reviewed at the editors’ discretion.

Appeals and Disputes: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed explanation. All appeals are considered carefully by the editorial board; whose decision is final.