All manuscripts sent to this journal must go through a peer review process. Overall review process is as following:

1. Submission of Paper
The corresponding author submits the paper to the journal. The corresponding author must created an account and conducted the submission process online throught her/his dashboard.

2. Editorial Assessment and Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief checks the composition and arrangement of the manuscrip acording to Author Guidelines and decides if the manuscript is sufficiently original and interesting to the reader(s). If the manuscript doesn't meet these criterias, it may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

3. Associate Editor Assignment
The qualified manuscript will be sent to an Associate Editors, who will handle the peer review process.

4. Invitation to Reviewers
The assigned Associate Editor sends invitations to individuals that she/he believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until two acceptances are obtained.

5. Review Process
The reviewers read the manuscript, if major problems are found, the reviewer(s) may reject the manuscript without further works. Otherwise, the reviewer(s) will make a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject the manuscripy, or else with a request for revision (major or minor) before it is reconsidered. The overall review process is conducted in a single blind/open review system.

6. Reviews Evaluation
The Associate Editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

7. The Decision
The Associate Editor sends a decision and the anonymous reviewers comments via email to the author.
If accepted, the manuscript is sent to production. If the manuscript is rejected or sent back for revision (minor/major), the Associate Editor must includes constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the manuscript. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. If minor revisions were requested, this follow-up review might be done by the Associate Editor.