Peer Review

Peer Review Process Guidelines

1. Submission and Initial Assessment

• Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal’s online submission system.

• Initial Assessment: The editorial team conducts an initial assessment to ensure the manuscript fits the journal’s scope and meets basic quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria are rejected without external review.

2. Peer Review Process

• Reviewer Selection: Manuscripts passing the initial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their knowledge, experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.

• Double-Blind Review: The Explorer employs a double-blind review process, where both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other to ensure impartiality.

• Review Criteria: Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on originality, significance, methodology, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations for improvement.

3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities

• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the stipulated time frame, typically 3-4 weeks.

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and not share or discuss it with others.

• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, constructive, and unbiased feedback, highlighting both strengths and areas for improvement.

• Ethical Considerations: Reviewers should report any ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest.

4. Editorial Decision

• Decision Making: Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on the manuscript. Possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.

• Communication: Authors are notified of the decision along with the reviewers’ comments. If revisions are required, authors are given a deadline to resubmit the revised manuscript.

5. Revision and Resubmission

• Revisions: Authors must address the reviewers’ comments and make necessary revisions. A detailed response to the reviewers’ comments should be provided, outlining how each point has been addressed.

• Resubmission: Revised manuscripts are resubmitted through the online submission system and may undergo further review if necessary.

6. Final Acceptance and Publication

• Final Acceptance: Once the manuscript meets all the requirements and revisions are satisfactorily addressed, it is accepted for publication.

• Proofreading: Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading. Authors will receive proofs for final approval before publication.

• Publication: The final version of the manuscript is published online and made freely accessible as part of the journal’s open-access policy.

7. Appeals and Complaints

• Appeals: Authors who wish to appeal a decision can contact the Editor-in-Chief with a detailed explanation. The journal has a formal process for handling appeals to ensure fair and unbiased resolution.

• Complaints: Any complaints regarding the peer review process or editorial decisions can be directed to the editorial office for investigation and resolution.