Peer review

Once the authors have submitted their work, there will be an initial assessment from the editorial board about the paper’s adequacy and suitability in terms of its subject matter, scope and aims. This means that the article may be rejected before the peer-review process if the Editor-in-Chief considers the article clearly not suitable for publication. Once it is considered to be suitable, the paper will undergo a double-blind review process that does not reveal the identity of either the author or the reviewer. Note that the double-blind peer review process will be carried out by a minimum of two external experts and that it can take anywhere between three months to six months.

The aim of the double-blind peer review process is to identify the article’s strengths and weaknesses in terms of its relevance, soundness, originality, language and readability. The reviewers will be evaluating the adequacy of the title, appropriateness of the applied methodology, the use of terminology, the uniformity and clarity of the text, the adequacy of the used literature, as well as inspecting the paper for errors and unnecessary repetitions.
Following the review of a manuscript, the authors will be sent an e-mail with the information about its status. Several outcomes are possible here: it may be accepted, it may need major or minor revision or it may be rejected. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted, although if the author/s choose to follow reviewers’ instructions there shouldn’t be any problems. Articles that were rejected will not be re-reviewed.

Please note that the journal’s editors routinely and actively check for plagiarism. In order to promote academic integrity and prevent any attempts of plagiarism, the papers will be uploaded to a plagiarism detection service under the name Turnitin.