PEER REVIEW POLICY

The journal follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to maintain academic integrity and quality.

1. Review Model

• Double-blind: Authors do not know reviewers; reviewers do not know authors
• Ensures unbiased and fair evaluation

2. Review Steps

1. Initial Screening
   Editor checks scope, originality, and basic formatting
2. Plagiarism Check
   Manuscripts are scanned for similarity
3. Reviewer Assignment
   Typically 2 independent reviewers
4. Review Time
   2–4 weeks (may vary depending on reviewer availability)
5. Reviewer Recommendations
   • Accept
   • Minor Revision
   • Major Revision
   • Reject
6. Final Decision
   Editor makes final decision based on reviewer feedback

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

• Maintain confidentiality
• Declare conflicts of interest
• Provide constructive and unbiased comments
• Follow ethical standards (COPE guidelines)

4. Appeals

Authors may request reconsideration only if they provide strong justification.