This journal uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.

After receiving a manuscript (online submission only) author will receive an automated acknowledge email. 

Each submission is checked for plagiarism (criteria > 16% further consult author guidelines) and relevance to the journal’s subject, aim, and scope. Manuscript preview as follows:

1: Each editorial board member will preview the manuscript to ensure the quality of the article and research and decide the manuscript whether the manuscript is suitable for the journal’s publication. 

2: If the editorial board deemed manuscript suitable for the publication then it is will be sent directly to the 2nd blind-review phase.

3: If the editorial board deemed suitable but requires minor changes than the author will be given a one-week deadline to incorporate minor revisions as suggested by the editorial board, before accepting an article for 2nd phase of blind-review.

If the submitted manuscript failed to comply with the journal’s criteria and editorial suggestion will result in the following three possibilities:

1. The manuscript will be rejected without any blind-review.

2. The manuscript will be sent back to comply with acceptable plagiarism criteria 

3. The manuscript will be sent back to made minor and major changes before blind-review.

4. The journal editorial board will send the manuscripts clearing 1st phase of the peer-review process to the 2nd phase of blind-review of international and national reviewer.

For the 2nd phase, blind-reviewers will be selected randomly from the journal reviewer’s database based on subject expertise and reviewers’ interest.

After receiving at least two external reviewers’ reports with recommendations, an email will be sent to the author containing reviewers' comments on the manuscript.

The author will be given maximum of 2 to 3 weeks with clearly mentioned deadlines e.g. The deadline to submit the revised article is dd.mm.yy, to incorporate reviewers’ comments and suggestions.

The author had to provide a review report along with the revised manuscript, indicating how and where the changes are made in the manuscript. 

Keeping in view the other academic/professional/personal commitments, authors can request extra time of one week to send back the revised manuscript.

After receiving the revised manuscript, the articles will be reevaluated by the editorial board on the bases of the blind-review suggestions incorporation and author review report.

Keeping in view the blind review suggestion and author's revised manuscript, chief editor and editor will make a decision:

(1) accept* (2) accept with minor revision** (3) decide after major revision** (4) reject***

The reasons for the decision will be communicated to the authors via email and online submission system.

*email correspondence and letter of acceptance (until final publication journal reserve the right to disclose article acceptance)

** minor/major revision is made, and the authors do not revise their articles satisfactorily after receiving reviewer reports. In the case of failing to comply with the quality criteria, submission deadline and revision requested will result in article rejection.

***the journal editorial board reserve the right to reject the article, if the author fails to incorporate suggestion after the blind-reviewers.

Note: book review is internally reviewed and the editor-in-chief decides to publish depending on the quality and relevance to the review to journal’s subjects.

Estimated timeline of complete peer review process

*paper is returned to authors, either if it does not meet the basic criteria of the journal or plagiarism exceed the acceptance criteria of 16%

** blind-review reports will be emailed to author containing minor or major revision.

*** authors are requested for further revision, if editors find that reviewers’ suggestions have not been incorporated reasonably or might result in article rejection