Policy

1. All articles submitted to the journal are subject to strict editorial review and double-blind peer review. They are evaluated by subject expert peer reviewers for the quality of content, literature review, research methodology, discussion, arguments, and conclusion.
2. Manuscripts are reviewed based on intellectual content regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenry, or political values of the author(s).
3. Any observed conflict of interest during the review process must be communicated to the Editor.
4. All information about the manuscript is kept confidential, and reasons for rejection are communicated only to the concerned Section Editor.

We disclose review parameters to help authors understand the review process and its efficiency.

Editorial Flow of a Manuscript

1. Internal Editorial Review:
   • Evaluation based on suitability with the journal's focus and scope.
   • Assessment of manuscript structure following author guidelines.
2. External Peer Review:
   • Submission to subject experts for comments and suggestions.
   • Review based on predefined parameters and policies.
3. Revisions advice to authors:
   • Language correction advice.
   • Provision of a peer-reviewed article file.
   • Turnitin report (if issues exist).
   • Journal template and editorial advice.
4. Final acceptance:
   • Evaluation of the revised manuscript by the editor.
   • Final decision and communication with the author.
   • Authors may be asked for re-revision to meet quality standards.
5. Final publication stage:
   • Authors receive a blueprint of the final galley for proofreading.
   • Publication and notification to authors via email.