Editor Guidelines

Editors are directly related with the reputation and the integrity of the journal, and the major responsibilies include:

● Monitor the journal for ensuring the fairness, timeliness, thoroughness, and civility of the process.

● Enhance the significant developments in the field for the growth of the journal.

All submitted manuscripts received by the editorial office will be checked by a professional in-house managing editor to determine whether they are properly prepared and whether they follow the ethical policies of the journal. Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. A double-blind review is applied, where authors' identities are not known to reviewers and reviewers identities are not known to authors.In the case of regular submissions, in-house assistant editors will select review experts from our reviewer list or from recommendations by an academic editor. These experts may also include editorial board members of the journal. Reviewers should not have published with any of the authors during the past five years and should not currently work or collaborate with any of the institutions of the authors of the submitted manuscript.

Editorial Decision and Revision
The in-house editors will notify the authors of the review result, which will be one of the following:
Accept after Minor Revisions:
The paper will be accepted after revision against the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given 7 days for minor revisions.
Reconsider after Major Revisions:
The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the quality of revision. Authors need to provide a point-by-point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a suitable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewers for further comments.
Reject and Encourage Resubmission:
If additional experiments or data are needed to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and authors will be encouraged to re-submit the paper once supplementary research have been completed.
Reject:
The article has serious flaws, and/or makes no original significant contribution. No offer of resubmission to the journal is provided.
All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.

Editors Submission
The editorial staff / editors / editorial board members should not be involved in publishing decisions on papers which they have written themselves or have been written by their family members or colleagues. Any such submission should be strictly subject to the journal’s usual editorial process. Peer review should be handled independently from the relevant author/editor and their research groups.