The following is the peer review workflow that every manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes during the course of the peer review process.
This journal operates a single-blind review process. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editorial office for suitability for the journal. Manuscripts deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of four independent expert reviewers to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance, revision or rejection of articles. The editor's decision is final.
The peer review process is as follow:
1. All manuscripts would be first reviewed by editorial office. Any papers fail to meet the basic standard of the journal would be desk rejected for reasons like out of scope, ethic issues, high similarities, etc. Then, editorial office would reassign selected papers to administrative editor.
2. Administrative editor would invite multiple reviewers to review this paper.
3. After at least four independent experts give their reviews and comments, editor would make the following final decision:
○ Accept ○ Minor Revision
○ Reject ○ Major Revision
4. Administrative editor would provide feedbacks based on review comments to the authors including editor’s decision.
5. When author submits an updated version of the manuscript with the necessary changes suggested by the reviewers, administrative editor would invite one or more of the original reviewers to reassess this revised paper. Then, editor would make final decision.
6. Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, the manuscript would undergo a final check by the editorial office in order to ensure that the manuscript and its review process adhere to the journal’s guidelines and policies. The authors would then be notified of the manuscript’s acceptance.
7. For submissions from editor or associate editors, other journal administrative editors handle them independently in strict accordance with the peer review process.