Peer Review Policy
The Journal considers the peer review process the cornerstone of academic quality and scientific excellence. We adhere to a Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure an objective and impartial evaluation.
1. Principles of the Review Process:
-
Total Anonymity: The identities of both authors and reviewers are kept strictly confidential to ensure that the evaluation focuses solely on scientific quality and content.
-
Expert Selection: Reviewers are selected based on their specific expertise and distinguished research records in Humanities or Applied Sciences.
2. Core Evaluation Criteria:
-
Originality and Innovation: The novel contribution and intellectual value the research adds to the field.
-
Methodology: The rigor and clarity of the scientific methods employed.
-
Results and Discussion: The accuracy of the analysis and the extent to which the results support the conclusions.
-
Scientific Integrity: Soundness of citations, references, and strict adherence to research ethics.
3. Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decision: Reviewers provide a detailed report culminating in one of the following recommendations:
-
Accept without revision.
-
Accept with minor revisions.
-
Accept with major revisions.
-
Reject.
The Editorial Board makes the final decision based on these reports. In the event of conflicting reviews, the manuscript is referred to a third (tie-breaker) reviewer to finalize the decision.
