Peer Review Policy
We are transparent in our reviewing process. A double-blind peer review process is applied for all manuscripts submitted to this journal (authors and reviewers are unaware of one another’s identity) and the author(s) is informed about the status of their contribution whether accepted or sent back to them for improvements.
Peer Review Process
• Step – 1: Once the manuscripts are received from the author, there is an initial screening done in order to check the paper’s format (the manuscript must meet the first criteria including: language, file format, citation format and etc.). If the manuscript fits the first criteria, it is sent to the Editorial team. If not, the manuscript is sent back to the author(s) for revision and resubmission.
• Step – 2: The manuscript is reviewed by the Subject Matter Expert (Associate editor) and the Editorial review members. Here the manuscript is evaluated in terms of novelty, subject, and scientific language. If the manuscript meets the scientific standards, it is sent [a1] to two reviewers. If not, the manuscript is sent to the editor in chief for a fast reject.
• Step – 3: Based on the Editorial’s opinion, the manuscript is sent to two reviewers.
• Step – 4: The Reviewers review the manuscript; the reviewers’ recommendation is:
• -Needs Minor Revision
• -Needs Major Revision
• Step – 4-1: The authors do the revision needed and resend the manuscript.
• Step – 4-2: The same reviewers review the revised file and leave comments for the editor in chief.
• Step – 5: Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editor in chief decides whether a manuscript can be;
• If the manuscript is accepted by the reviewers, author(s) will be notified. Author/Corresponding Author will be notified about the possible date of publication. The entire process takes a maximum of 1-3 months.
• The journal has the right to edit the articles’ language. The authors must collaborate during the process of the edition and page designing, confirming the data and the final pdf.