Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous review and evaluation process to ensure the quality, originality, and relevance of the published articles.

Upon submission, each manuscript is first screened by the Editorial Board through an initial assessment. During this stage, the editors evaluate the manuscript's suitability with the journal's aims and scope, compliance with author guidelines, and overall academic quality. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be rejected at this stage without proceeding to external review.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the preliminary evaluation will be assigned to independent reviewers through a Double-Blind Peer Review process. Under this system, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process to maintain fairness, objectivity, and academic integrity.

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, relevance, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, significance of findings, and contribution to the advancement of knowledge and community service practices. The reviewers are academics, researchers, and professionals with expertise relevant to the subject matter of the submitted manuscript.

Based on the reviewers' comments and recommendations, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept Submission

  2. Accept with Minor Revisions

  3. Revise and Resubmit

  4. Reject Submission

Authors will be notified of the editorial decision and, where applicable, will be invited to revise their manuscripts according to the reviewers' suggestions. Revised manuscripts may be subject to further evaluation before a final decision is made.

The final decision regarding publication rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board.

Review Procedure

  1. Manuscript submission by the author(s).

  2. Initial editorial screening and evaluation.

  3. Double-Blind Peer Review by independent reviewers.

  4. Editorial assessment based on reviewers' recommendations.

  5. Notification of the editorial decision to the author(s).

  6. Revision process (if required).

  7. Final acceptance and publication.