Peer Review Policy
PEER REVIEW POLICY
Articles submitted for possible publication are subjected to peer-review. We follow a double-blind, peer review process. Articles are first reviewed by editors. The editor may reject it out of hand either because it is not dealing with the subject matter for that journal or because it is manifestly of a low quality so that it cannot be considered at all. Articles that are found suitable for review are then sent to two experts in the field of the paper (Refreees or external Peer reviewers). Referees of a paper are unknown to each other. Referees are asked to classify the paper as publishable immediately, publishable with amendments and improvements, or not publishable. Referees’ evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the manuscript. Referees’ comments are then seen by the author.
Editors should be ready to justify any important deviation from the described process. Editors should not reverse decisions on publication unless serious problems are identified.
Editors should publish guidance to both authors and reviewers on everything that is expected of them. This guidance should be regularly updated and will refer to or link to this code.
Further details are available under the link Editorial and Peer Review Process