First Evaluation

The Deputy Editor-in-Chief collects manuscript submissions, reviewing only those that comply with the journal’s author guidelines. Eligible submissions are forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief, who may consult the Associate Editors. The manuscript is either accepted for peer review or rejected. The primary goal at this stage is to ensure the submission meets scholarly standards. Manuscripts undergo plagiarism checks and can be rejected for the following reasons: not alignment to the journal’s scope; non-compliance with submission guidelines; formatting, orthographic, or syntactical errors; plagiarism or excessive content similarity with other sources; lack of scientific relevance; outdated theoretical approaches; limited methodology, or insufficient methodological details. Manuscripts found acceptable for peer review proceed to peer review for further evaluation by subject-matter experts.

Peer Review

The Editor-in-Chief/Deputy Editor-in-Chief assigns at least two field experts (not part of the editorial board) to review each manuscript using a double-blind review process. Reviewers assess the submission based on rigor, coherence, engagement with existing research, and overall contribution to the field, with a focus on methodology, analysis, and interpretation. Reviewers provide feedback on: novelty and originality; significance within the field; clarity and structure; methodological rigor; linguistic quality; relevance and quality of figures; overall scholarly contribution. If a manuscript does not comply in full with the journal’s standards, reviewers provide constructive criticism for improvement. Authors may be invited to revise and resubmit their work. After all reviews are considered, the Editor-in-Chief/ Deputy Editor-in-Chief sends a decision letter with one of the following outcomes:

1. Acceptance without revision

2. Minor revision

3. Major revision

4. Rejection

Final Decision

If revisions are required, authors should submit their revised manuscript promptly. The Editor-in-Chief/Deputy Editor-in-Chief evaluates the revisions and may request further modifications if necessary. After the final review, the Editor-in-Chief makes the ultimate decision:

A. Acceptance

or

B. Rejection

---