Peer Review Policies

NexAvens Scientific Library follows a Double anonymous peer-review process, ensuring that both the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential. This fosters an impartial, transparent, and fair review environment.

1. Reviewer Selection
Authors may suggest up to three potential reviewers when submitting their manuscripts; however, these suggestions are not binding. Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise in the relevant theoretical, methodological, thematic, and geographic areas of the manuscript. At least one editorial board member will be included among the reviewers.

2. Impartiality and Conflict of Interest
All reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest before reviewing a manuscript. Reviewers are expected to conduct unbiased, objective evaluations and provide constructive, professional feedback. They should not have any personal or professional relationship with the author(s) that might compromise their impartiality.

3. Review Process and Timeline
Reviewers are given two weeks to provide their assessments. If revisions are required, authors are expected to submit their revised manuscript within one week of receiving reviewer feedback. The review process aims to be efficient and thorough, maintaining a high standard of quality.

4. Discrepancies in Reviews
If there is a substantial difference of opinion among reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief will consult with the managing or guest editor to make a final decision. This ensures that any conflicting feedback is resolved fairly and transparently.

5. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviews, the Editor-in-Chief and editorial board will make a decision regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript. This decision will be communicated to the author(s) along with the relevant reviewer comments.