The Journal is supported by a highly experienced editorial board and a distinguished panel of expert peer reviewers dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of academic excellence. Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial evaluation to assess its scholarly validity, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Based on this assessment, the manuscript may be accepted for review, returned for revision, or declined.

Peer Review Process

All eligible submissions are evaluated through a rigorous double-blind peer review process conducted by subject-matter experts. Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, conceptual framework, methodological integrity, structure, and contribution to the discipline. This process ensures that each published article satisfies the journal’s academic, ethical, and scientific quality benchmarks. Additionally, manuscripts are screened for textual similarity to safeguard against plagiarism and uphold research integrity.

Upon successful completion of peer review and final acceptance, the article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and registered with Crossref, enabling persistent identification, citation tracking, and long-term accessibility.

Editorial Responsibilities

• Initial Screening: Evaluation of the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope, academic quality, language clarity, and adherence to submission guidelines.
• Plagiarism Assessment: Manuscripts undergo similarity detection. Submissions exhibiting unethical overlap or uncredited appropriation are rejected in accordance with editorial ethics policies.
• Peer Review Coordination: Selection of qualified reviewers and management of a fair, unbiased, and confidential double-blind review process.
• Feedback and Revision: Communication of reviewer comments to authors and oversight of revisions to ensure scholarly improvement and compliance.
• Final Decision: Determination based on reviewer evaluations, editorial judgment, and academic m