Peer review process

All manuscripts are initially evaluated by the editor-in-chief based solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, or any other personal circumstances.

Following this preliminary assessment, and provided the submission aligns with the established objectives of the journal, the editor-in-chief forwards the paper for peer review. Submissions undergo a double-blind peer review process, in which at least two independent reviewers evaluate the manuscript anonymously. If the two reviews differ significantly, a third review is commissioned. This process is a key element in maintaining the journal’s high academic standards.

The peer review process, which should not exceed three months, results in one of the following recommendations:

• acceptance without changes,
• acceptance subject to minor or major revisions, or
• rejection.

In addition to peer review, accepted papers undergo editorial revision to ensure consistency in formatting, style, and spelling. The final decision regarding publication is made by the editor-in-chief, in consultation with the editorial board, and is based on the reviewers’ reports as well as any revisions made by the authors.