Peer-Review Process

Initially, all papers are first reviewed by an editorial committee consisting of three or more members of the editorial team to ensure their appropriateness and relevance to the journal's framework. The primary purpose is to decide whether to send a paper for peer review and to provide a rapid decision on those that are not. Papers that do not meet basic standards or are unlikely to be published irrespective of a positive peer review—such as those with insufficient novel contributions or unclear relevance to the discipline—may be rejected at this point to avoid delays for authors who may wish to seek publication elsewhere. Manuscripts may also be excluded by the editors if there are major faults in the research methodology. Authors can expect a decision from this stage of the review process within two weeks of submission.

Manuscripts proceeding to the review process are handled anonymously, and comments are discussed in weekly editorial sessions. Reviews are then sent to the corresponding authors for proposed modifications, and the revised manuscript will undergo a second peer review by one or two external reviewers. If the reviewers consent, we also conduct an open peer review process. We aim to complete the review process within six weeks of the decision to review, although occasional delays may occur. Authors should allow at least eight weeks from submission before contacting the journal. The Chief Editor reserves the right to make the final decision regarding acceptance.