Peer Review Process
Prior to their publication, all works undergo a double-blind peer-review process that is organized independently by the editorial team.
The corresponding author must submit the manuscript electronically using the Open Journal System (OJS). Information on the preparation and submission of the manuscript can be found in the Instructions for Authors for the Preparation and Submission of the Manuscript.
Peer reviewers are carefully selected by editors for their objectivity and scientific knowledge to provide a written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, to comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, to provide the author with useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript, and to identify and prevent research misconduct, including checking manuscripts for plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification or fabrication. In the process of identifying and dealing with allegations of research misconduct, the journal, editors, and reviewers abide by COPE's guidelines.
The reviewer and the author are anonymous from each throughout the review process. To facilitate this, authors must ensure that their manuscripts are drafted in such a way that they do not reveal their identities to the reviewers, neither directly nor indirectly.
All articles are peer-reviewed confidentially by external, professional, courteous, prompt, and constructive experts in the scientific topic addressed. Reviewer anonymity allows for impartial decisions, as the reviewer cannot be influenced by the author. The review must be objective and the critical assessment clearly expressed and supported by arguments. Personal criticism toward the author is unpermissible.
Reviewers should identify the relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. Additionally, the reviewers should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper which they have personal knowledge of.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the reviewers’ own research without an express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not assess manuscripts in which they might have any conflicts of interest.
The author is obliged to review the improvements, take them into consideration to the largest extent possible, and amend the article within a deadline determined by the editors. Should the author fail to return the article within the set deadline, the article shall be rejected. If the author does not take into account any of the proposed improvements, they must provide the reasons for having done so in writing.
Upon the completion of the peer-review process, the author is returned the manuscript with recommendations for improvements in order to check and approve the recommendations proposed and draw up a clean copy. The editors send the clean copy into proofreading.
After the review, the text is formatted by a designer. The author receives the first print and is requested to identify any typing errors. The corrections are to be returned within three days; otherwise, the editors shall deem that the author is satisfied with the first print.
Additional information on the peer review process can be found in Instructions for Authors for the Preparation and Submission of the Manuscript.
