The review process of articles follows:
All articles are initially reviewed by the editorial board of the journal. Papers approved by the editorial board will be sent to two expert reviewers. The review process is double-blind. Authors can introduce two expert reviewers at the time of submission, but the journal decides about the proposed reviewers, and in any event, the name of the selected reviewer will not be disclosed to the authors]. In the reviewing process, the article is first reviewed by two expert reviewers in the relevant field. For publication, two reviewers need to have the same opinions on a particular manuscript. If both expert reviewers approve the article, it will be accepted for publication.
If the article is approved by one expert reviewer but rejected by the other, the author will be asked to revise it and the third referee will decide to accept or reject the article (see review process, for more information).
Reviewers’ decisions for the manuscript will be one of the following:
1. Approve the manuscript in its current form
2. Approve the manuscript with minor corrections.
3. Approve the manuscript with major corrections: This means that the manuscript needs general and structural changes (After revising the manuscript by the author, it will be sent to the reviewers for further judgement; if the reviewers approve the manuscript, the article will be published. The article will be rejected if the comments have not been addressed correctly and the reviewer thinks further revisions are needed.
* Note: If an author disagrees with some or all of reviewers’ comments, she/he may submit her/his appeal in a text entitled "Responding to reviewers" and upload it through ‘Add files’ tab on the journal personal page and provide a counter- argument against reviewers’ comments and support them with the convincing evidence. The answer will be reviewed by the editorial board and the reviewers and then the author will be informed about the new decision.