Review Policy

The journal follows a double-blind peer-review process for publishing the manuscript, meaning that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers and vice versa throughout the review process. The process involves the submission of a manuscript by an author to a journal for consideration. After initial screening by the journal editor, the manuscript is then forwarded to two or more expert reviewers who are unaware of the author’s identity. This ensures that the review process is impartial and that the manuscript is judged solely on its merits.

The responsibility of the Managing Editor:

• The Managing Editor will assess the article submitted by the author and send to the internal reviewers for primary review.
• The internal reviewers initially reviewed the submitted manuscript to ensure that it complies with the journal’s publication ethics, author’s guidelines, and research areas of the journal.
• Checking the plagiarism of the submitted manuscript and accepting the plagiarized free manuscript for external review.
• Sending the manuscript to the Editorial Team for evaluation upon fulfilling the journal’s criteria.
• Responsible for publishing after receiving the galley proof from the author, including proofreading, copy editing, and resolving any issue arises.
• Maintain the indexing database and increase the visibility of articles.

The responsibility of the Editorial Team includes:

• The Editor-in-Chief will ensure whether the submitted manuscript is aligned with the publication area of the journal or not.
• After satisfying the publication area, the manuscript sends to multiple reviewers who are experts in the same research area.
• The editorial team will compile the reviews’ feedback and send the feedback to the author and follow up with the author’s feedback until satisfied with the reviewer’s comments.
• The Editor-in-Chief will decide whether the article is acceptable to publish or not.

The responsibility of the Reviewer:

• The reviewers provide feedback, suggestions for improvements, and recommendations to the managing editor to decide whether the article is acceptable or needs to request some changes from the author’s side.
• The reviewers are responsible for providing unbiased feedback in a competent and written format timely.
• The reviewer's responsibility is to review the manuscript to ensure that it complies with the author's guidelines.
• The reviewer should comment on places where mismatch of data, errors in methodology, mismatch in results and discussion, clear and understandable conclusion, a similar flow of referencing, misleading information, and coherence of writing are found.
• Reviewers must provide unbiased and constructive feedback on submitted works.
• Reviewers must not use their position to gain access to confidential information.

The author's responsibility includes:

• The author should read and follow the author’s guidelines of the journal carefully.
• The author should follow the publication ethics of the journal, i.e., plagiarism, misleading data & information, misconduct of research, etc.
• Submit the manuscript using the journal portal.
• Fulfilling the feedback and all comments made by reviewers and editorial team members and sending the corrected manuscript on time.
• Reviewing the final copyedited file and Galley Proof before publication.

The responsibility of the production house includes:

• Checking the journal formatting, prototypes, and design.
• Reviewing the Managing editor to send the final version of the manuscript for the galley proof.
• Archiving the published article on the indexed website and the journal's own repository.

The peer-reviewed policy takes place from submission to publication within 30-60 days. Author names, affiliations, and other potentially identifying information should be removed from the submitted manuscript text and any accompanying files, such as tables and figures of supplementary material. Any acknowledgments, funding information, disclosures, or copyright permissions to use copyright items or materials should also be included on this page.

The flowchart of the review activity