Editorial stages
- Submission checks: files, authorship information, declarations, anonymization, and basic compliance are reviewed.
- Editorial screening: an editor assesses scope, originality, scholarly contribution, methodological suitability, and ethical concerns.
- Peer review: suitable manuscripts are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers under double-blind review.
- Editorial decision: the editor considers the manuscript, reviewer reports, and applicable policies.
- Revision: authors may be invited to submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response.
- Final assessment: the editor may make a decision or seek additional review.
- Production: accepted work undergoes copy preparation, metadata checks, proof review, and publication scheduling.
- Publication: the version of record is published open access under CC BY 4.0.
Possible decisions
Decisions may include decline without external review, reject after review, invite major revision, invite minor revision, or accept. A revision invitation is not a guarantee of acceptance.
Editorial independence
Commercial considerations, publication fees, and personal relationships must not determine editorial outcomes. Editors must recuse themselves where a conflict could reasonably affect, or appear to affect, impartial judgment.
Timing
The journal aims to handle submissions efficiently, but review and decision times vary according to manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, revision quality, and the need for specialist or ethical assessment. The journal does not guarantee a fixed decision date.