The journal follows a double‑blind peer review policy. This model is adopted to uphold the highest standards of impartiality, fairness, and scholarly quality throughout all stages of manuscript evaluation.

Definition and Mechanism

In the double‑blind peer review model, two key measures are implemented to ensure anonymity:

1.Reviewer anonymity:

Reviewers who evaluate the manuscript are not informed of the identity of the author(s). Likewise, authors are never informed of the identities of the reviewers.

2. Author anonymity:

The names and identifying details of authors, including their institutional affiliations, are concealed from reviewers throughout the evaluation process.

 

Rationale and Objectives of Double‑Blind Review

The journal considers strict anonymity essential for the following reasons:

1. Limiting bias:

Concealing author identities significantly reduces potential reviewer bias related to personal characteristics such as gender, country of origin, institutional prestige, academic rank, or prior publication record. This ensures that all manuscripts are evaluated under equal conditions, regardless of the authors’ backgrounds.

2. Focus on content:

By masking identities, reviewers are required to focus exclusively on the content, methodology, results, and overall scholarly contribution of the manuscript. Submissions by well‑known authors are assessed solely on the quality of the work presented, not on prior reputation.

3. Integrity of the scholarly record:

The impartial nature of double‑blind review contributes directly to maintaining the credibility and integrity of the published academic record.

Authors’ Responsibilities in Maintaining Anonymity

To ensure the proper implementation of double‑blind peer review, authors bear primary responsibility for the correct preparation of submission files:

1. The main manuscript file must be submitted without author names or any identifying information in the text, figures, or supplementary materials.
2. All identifying details, including author names, institutional affiliations, and acknowledgements, must be included only in a separate file labeled “Title Page.”
3. Authors must exercise caution when citing their own previous work. For example, phrases such as “in our previous study” should be replaced with neutral formulations such as “previous studies have shown…” to avoid revealing authorship.

Although complete anonymity may occasionally be difficult to achieve—due to citation practices or highly specialized research topics—authors are expected to make every reasonable effort to prevent inadvertent disclosure of their identity.

The double‑blind peer review policy constitutes a core pillar of the journal’s editorial practice and plays a crucial role in maintaining the journal’s selective standards and academic rigor.