For Reviewers

The journal employs a double-blind peer review process. For detailed information on the peer review process, editor responsibilities, and conflicts of interest, see the Editorial and Ethical Policy section.

Reviewers are selected based on:

Subject matter expertise and active publication record

No conflicts of interest with authors (institutional, collaborative, or personal)

Geographic and institutional diversity

Previous review quality (for returning reviewers)

Review Timeline

Reviewer evaluation period: 3–4 weeks from acceptance;

Average total review duration: Two months.

Notification: Reviewers unable to meet the deadline must inform the editor immediately.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

Provide thorough, evidence-based, constructive feedback using the journal's assessment form for reviewers: Assessment form

The journal strictly prohibits the use of artificial intelligence tools in the peer review process. Peer review is a scholarly activity that requires personal expertise, critical judgment, and ethical responsibility on the part of the reviewer. Accordingly, only the reviewer’s own professional knowledge and experience may be employed in conducting the review.