Peer Review & Submission Policy

Once a manuscript clears the initial screening and is deemed fit for potential publication, it embarks on a rigorous peer review journey. Typically, it is evaluated by two or more subject-matter experts. During the submission process, authors are encouraged but not obliged to suggest two to three qualified reviewers with relevant expertise. These suggested reviewers must not be affiliated with the same institution as any of the manuscript's contributors. However, the final selection of reviewers rests entirely with the editorial team.

The journal upholds a strict double-blind review policy: neither the authors nor the reviewers are privy to each other's identities, ensuring an unbiased evaluation. Each manuscript is also assigned to a dedicated member of the editorial board, who makes the final publication decision based on the reviewers' insights.

Reviewers' feedback—whether it involves acceptance, rejection, or recommendations for improvement—is relayed to the corresponding author. If revisions are needed, the author must submit a detailed, point-by-point response addressing each comment, along with the revised manuscript. This dialogue may continue through multiple rounds until both reviewers and editors are fully satisfied with the work's quality and integrity.

Reporting Standards & Authorship Ethics

Authors submitting original research are expected to provide a truthful and transparent account of their study, including accurate descriptions of the methods used and an impartial discussion of their findings and significance. To support editorial evaluation, authors may be requested to share the raw data (preferably in an Excel file) alongside their manuscript, and should be ready to make such data publicly available, where feasible.

All submitted work must be entirely original. If ideas, words, or content from other sources have been used, they must be properly cited. Any form of plagiarism exceeding 20% is considered a serious ethical violation and will not be tolerated. Only those individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research and are willing to take public responsibility for its content should be listed as authors. Alongside this, authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and fully acknowledge all sources of financial support that enabled the research. Proper attribution of prior work is essential. Influential studies that shaped the direction or substance of the manuscript must be cited appropriately.

Processing Timeline

The entire submission and review process is conducted online (via mail), and authors can expect an average processing time of 6-7 weeks from submission to decision.

General Submission Guidelines

• Authors are requested to submit manuscripts with the clear understanding that the work is original, has not been published elsewhere (excluding abstracts or thesis), and is not under review by any other journal at the time of submission.
• The Corresponding Author holds the primary responsibility for ensuring that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission. Additionally, if the research originates from an institution, it is the authors' duty to obtain any necessary institutional approvals prior to submission.
• Manuscripts should be submitted electronically. To streamline the process, the complete document—including the main text, tables, and figures or plates—must be compiled into a single Microsoft Word file.
• All editorial communications and galley proofs will be directed to the corresponding author, unless specified otherwise.
• Authors should note that submitting a paper implies consent to editorial editing for clarity, coherence, and readability.
• Once proofs have been prepared, no additions or removals of author names will be permitted under any circumstance.
• For all queries related to the submission, status, or publication of manuscripts, authors are encouraged to contact the Editor via email.