Journal Review Process


  1. Submission of Paper

The article is submitted to the journal by the corresponding or submitting author through the online submission system.


  1. Editorial Office Assessment

The journal editors check the article’s composition and arrangement to make sure it complies with the journal’s Author Guidelines. The quality of the paper is not assessed yet.


  1. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief checks if the paper’s topic is in accordance with the scope of the journal and if it represents original research. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.


  1. Invitation to Reviewers

The Editor-in-Chief forwards the article to individuals who have enough expertise in the field to serve as reviewers. In general, two reviewers are assigned per article, but this may vary.


  1. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.


  1. Review is Conducted

The peer-review process is conducted as single-blind. Ideally, the reviewer reads the paper several times. The first read allows the formation of an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer can reject the paper without further evaluation. Otherwise, the paper will be read several more times in order to create a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually designated as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.


  1. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The Editor-in-Chief considers all the returned reviews before making a decision. If the reviews differ significantly, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an additional opinion before making a decision.


  1. The Decision is Communicated

The Editor-in-Chief sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments, but without revealing the identity of the reviewer.


  1. Next Steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested, this follow-up review might be done by the editor.