Review Process

We uphold the principles of academic integrity and strive to ensure fairness and impartiality in our peer review process. To maintain the highest standards of quality and objectivity, we have implemented a Double-Blind Review Process, outlined as follows:

Objective: The Double-Blind Review Process is designed to eliminate bias and ensure that the evaluation of submitted manuscripts is based solely on their scholarly merit, irrespective of authors' identities or affiliations.

Anonymous Submission: Authors are required to submit their manuscripts without any identifying information such as author names, affiliations, or acknowledgments that may reveal their identities.

Reviewer Anonymity: Reviewers are carefully selected based on their expertise in the relevant field. Throughout the review process, reviewers remain anonymous to the authors, and authors' identities are concealed from the reviewers.

Editorial Oversight: The editorial team facilitates the double-blind review process, ensuring that reviewers receive anonymized manuscripts and authors receive blinded reviewer comments and feedback.

Fair Evaluation: Reviewers are instructed to evaluate manuscripts based on criteria such as originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and adherence to ethical standards, without prejudice or influence from author identities.

Confidentiality: Reviewers are bound by confidentiality agreements to maintain the confidentiality of the review process and refrain from disclosing any information about the manuscripts they review.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise their impartiality in reviewing a particular manuscript. Editors carefully consider these disclosures when assigning reviewers.

Reviewer Selection: Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, experience, and objectivity. Efforts are made to avoid conflicts of interest and ensure diverse perspectives in the review process.

Transparency and Accountability: While the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the review process, the editorial team maintains transparency and accountability by documenting all review activities and decisions.

Continuous Improvement: We continually evaluate and refine our double-blind review process to ensure its effectiveness and adherence to best practices in scholarly publishing and peer review.

Through the implementation of our Double-Blind Review Process,  we committed to upholding the integrity of academic scholarship, fostering a fair and rigorous peer review environment, and advancing knowledge dissemination within the scholarly commu