Review Process of Manuscripts
The journal employs a double-blind peer-review system, with all manuscripts undergoing a strict three-stage review process: initial review, external review, and final review. The sole criterion for acceptance is the quality of manuscripts, involving originality, validity and readability. Upon submission, authors will be informed of the result of the initial review within one week and expert review feedback within 1–2 months. The review process takes three months on average.
Initial Review
The editorial office conducts the preliminary review. Manuscripts beyond the journal’s scope or with major flaws (e.g., a lack of novelty, irrational design, poor quality of writing) or academic misconduct will be rejected immediately. Authors are typically notified within 1 week whether the manuscript is rejected or sent for external review.
External Review
Manuscripts passing the initial review are assigned to editorial board members and/or external experts in the field. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts. The journal follows a double-blind review process—identities are not known between reviewers and authors. Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality. Authors are to respond to each comment by the reviewer, submit a revised manuscript, and provide a detailed revision report.
Final Review
The Editor-in-Chief ultimately decides whether the article can be published.
Reviewers must keep manuscript details confidential. In case of direct conflicts of interest (e.g., personal, institutional, or financial ties to the authors), reviewers must notify the editorial office and decline review. The journal highly values objective, fair, and constructive feedback from reviewers.
If authors disagree with the review outcome, they may submit an appeal. A written justification must be sent to the journal’s email, detailing the grounds for reconsideration. The editorial office will evaluate the appeal and decide whether to proceed.