Each article is evaluated by at least two scholars in a procedure that keeps both the author and the reviewers anonymous, hence the term ‘double-blind.’ There are several steps in the review process, which can be longer or shorter depending on the journal.
The editor does an initial review of an article, sometimes with the help of the Editorial Board, to determine whether it meets the journal’s requirements. This means that the article must comply with the journal’s guidelines (Scope, format, minimum and maximum number of words, and style) and fit the journal’s goals and editorial policy. The article would also be checked using ‘plagiarism’ checking system by Software iThenticate. If the article is not aligned with the journal’s interests or objectives or if a very preliminary version has been submitted (with errors, shortcomings or a poorly developed argument), or if the article has a high text similarity of more than 20%, it will be desk-rejected. Once the editor has green lighted an article, the review process begins
At least two review reports are collected for each submitted article. Suggestions of reviewers can be made by the academic editor during pre-check. Alternatively, the editorial staff can assign the reviewers from the existing database, or new reviewers identified by web searches for related articles. The potential reviewer suggested by the author during article submission process, may also be approached. The editorial staff would ensure that there are no potential conflicts of interest and will not consider those reviewers with competing interests.