Reviewing and Evaluating process: Double Blind-peer-review

The reviewing process of this journal is a positive process whose main goal is to improve the quality of the articles published in the journal. For this purpose, sometimes the articles that do not help to improve the quality of this publication are removed, and sometimes the authors are given the necessary advice to improve the quality of the article.

First Control 

In First control and scientific evaluation of the article by the editor, the following items can be important in the success of the article to enter the review stage.

1.  The format of the article is well respected (according to the authors' guide page).
2. There should be enough and detailed content for the reader to fully understand the author's analysis in the article.
3.  The article should have something new to add to science.
4.  The innovation of the article compared to similar works should be well mentioned in the title, introduction, results and suggestions.
5.  The background has been used artistically in different parts of the article; Not that it is only reported in the form of discrete paragraphs.
6.  References should be up-to-date.
7.  Results should be based on data, analysis and logic of the article.
8. There should be enough information about data, analysis and sample in the article.

Initial review

If the above conditions are met, the editor will send your article to two or three reviewers. In the following cases, your article can pass the Initial review stage well.

1.  Both reviewers issue minor corrections.
2.  One of the reviewers issue minor corrections and the other issue major corrections.
3.  Both reviewers issue major corrections.

Note: If one of thereviewers rejects and the other  issue major corrections (or acceptance), then the article will be sent to the third reviewer and acted upon according to his opinion.

Note: In cases where both reviewers reject the article (or one reviewer issue major corrections and the other rejects the article), with the approval of the editor, the article will be removed from the review process.

Doing Corrections

If the article passes the initial review stage successfully, the comments of the reviewers along with the detailed comments of the editor are sent to the author and the author makes the corrections. The corrections made should be marked with a different color and explained in a separate letter. In cases where the reviewers's opinion is not applied, a convincing reason must be provided.

Final Review (Approval of corrections)

After making corrections, the article is referred to one or two reviewers (at the discretion of the editor) in order to approve the corrections.

If the Initial reviewers or Final reviewer only issue minor corrections, the editor can approve the corrections and accept the article.

Reception

If the corrections are approved by the reviewers , the acceptance of the article is issued. In general, the reviewer' opinion about the article is only an advisory opinion to the editorial board and the editor, and the final decision (about the acceptance or rejection of the article) is taken by the editor. Things like the duration of the review, the type of the author's need for acceptance, or the type of research from which the article was extracted, have no role in this decision.