Peer Review Policy
Each paper is first reviewed by the editor and, if it is deemed suitable for this publication, it is then sent to two referees for peer review. The decision to publish a manuscript will be based on the Board’s recommendations. The same review procedure applies for manuscripts submitted by members of the journal’s Editorial Board.
Contribution to Editorial Decision
The journal reviewers would be assisting the editors in making editorial decisions and improving the manuscript through the editorial communications.
It is the responsibility of the selected referees to notify the editor if they feel they are inadequately qualified to review the assigned manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible so that they could be excused from the review process.
Reviewers should treat the manuscript received as a confidential document. The manuscript must not be discussed with or shown to others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviewers should express their views objectively and clearly with supporting arguments. There shall be no personal criticism towards the author.
Acknowledgement of Source
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement of an observation, derivation, or argument that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also notify the editor if there is any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.