Peer Review Policy

All journals published on Scipora are committed to maintaining rigorous, transparent, and ethical peer-review processes that ensure the quality and credibility of scholarly publications. Peer review is a fundamental component of academic publishing and serves as the primary mechanism for validating the originality, accuracy, and significance of submitted research.

Editorial Responsibility

The peer-review process is fully managed by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board of each journal. Editors are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers, overseeing the review process, and making final publication decisions based on reviewer feedback and their own scholarly judgment. Scipora does not participate in editorial evaluation or decision-making.

Review Models

Each journal determines its own peer-review model based on disciplinary norms and best practices. This may include single-blind, double-blind, or open peer review. Regardless of the model adopted, journals are expected to ensure fairness, confidentiality, and impartiality throughout the review process.

Reviewer Selection and Conduct

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic qualifications, and relevance to the manuscript’s subject area. They are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations. Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest and maintain strict

confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts and review content.

Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts are assessed based on criteria such as originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal’s scope, and contribution to the field. Editorial decisions are made by considering reviewer reports alongside the editors’ independent assessment.

Confidentiality and Integrity

All submitted manuscripts and review communications are treated as confidential. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, use, or share unpublished material for personal or professional advantage. Any suspected ethical issues, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate submission, are handled in accordance with established publication ethics guidelines.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their assessment of a manuscript. Where conflicts exist, alternative reviewers or editors will be assigned to ensure impartiality.

Review Timelines and Efficiency

Journals aim to conduct peer review in a timely and efficient manner while maintaining high-quality standards. Authors will be informed of editorial decisions as promptly as possible, and revisions may be requested based on reviewer feedback.

Final Decision Authority

The final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief or designated editorial authority of the journal. Reviewer recommendations are advisory and contribute to the editorial evaluation process but are not binding.

Role of Scipora

Scipora provides the technical infrastructure and tools that support the peer-review workflow, including manuscript submission systems, communication platforms, and production services. However, Scipora does not access manuscript content for evaluation purposes and has no influence over editorial or peer-review decisions.

This policy ensures that all published research undergoes fair, independent, and high-quality peer review, reinforcing the integrity and trustworthiness of the scholarly record.