The Editorial Guidelines provide a framework for editors to manage manuscript submissions, peer review, editorial decisions, publication ethics, and the overall quality of the journal. Editors are expected to perform their responsibilities objectively, transparently, consistently, and in accordance with internationally recognized principles of publication ethics and research integrity.

Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic quality, integrity, and credibility of the journal. Editors should:

• Manage submitted manuscripts fairly, objectively, and efficiently.
• Ensure that editorial decisions are based on the academic quality, originality, relevance, and scientific contribution of the manuscript.
• Ensure that all manuscripts are handled according to the journal's policies and scope.
• Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and editorial correspondence.
• Ensure that peer review is conducted by qualified and independent reviewers.
• Monitor the timeliness and quality of the peer-review process.
• Address ethical concerns and allegations of research misconduct appropriately.
• Ensure that editorial decisions are not influenced by personal, institutional, financial, political, or commercial interests.

All submitted manuscripts should undergo an initial editorial screening before being sent for peer review. Editors should assess:

• Whether the manuscript falls within the scope of the journal.
• Whether the manuscript follows the journal's submission and formatting requirements.
• Whether the title, abstract, keywords, and manuscript structure are complete.
• Whether the manuscript demonstrates sufficient academic and scientific relevance.
• Whether the research problem, objectives, methodology, and expected contribution are reasonably clear.
• Whether the manuscript contains obvious ethical, plagiarism, duplication, or research integrity concerns.
• Whether the manuscript is sufficiently prepared to enter the peer-review process.

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum submission requirements may be returned to the authors for technical correction before entering peer review.

Editors should ensure that submitted manuscripts undergo appropriate similarity or plagiarism screening before or during the editorial process.

• Use an appropriate plagiarism or similarity detection system.
• Evaluate similarity reports based on context rather than relying solely on a numerical similarity percentage.
• Distinguish legitimate quotations and commonly used technical expressions from inappropriate copying.
• Investigate substantial or suspicious similarities with previously published work.
• Refer serious cases of suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or research misconduct to the appropriate editorial authority.

A high similarity score should not automatically determine rejection. Editors should evaluate the nature, source, and context of the identified similarities.

Editors should assign manuscripts to appropriate handling editors and reviewers based on their expertise and the subject of the manuscript.

• Select reviewers who have relevant academic or professional expertise.
• Avoid reviewers who have conflicts of interest with the authors or manuscript.
• Consider reviewer independence, experience, and previous review performance.
• Where possible, avoid excessive reliance on the same reviewers.
• Ensure that reviewers are given sufficient information and adequate time to complete the review.
• Monitor reviewer responsiveness and replace reviewers when necessary.

Editors should ensure that manuscripts undergo a fair, rigorous, and appropriate peer-review process.

• Use qualified and independent reviewers.
• Ensure that reviewers evaluate the manuscript objectively and constructively.
• Consider the scientific quality and relevance of reviewer comments.
• Request additional reviews when the existing reviews are contradictory or insufficient.
• Ensure that reviewer identities and confidential information are protected according to the journal's peer-review model.
• Do not allow personal opinions unrelated to the scientific quality of the manuscript to influence editorial decisions.

Editorial decisions should be based on the overall scientific quality of the manuscript and the evidence provided through peer review.

Editors may consider the following recommendations:

• Accept: The manuscript meets the journal's standards and requires no substantive revision.
• Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited revisions that do not substantially affect the research design or scientific contribution.
• Major Revision: The manuscript has potential but requires substantial revisions to methodology, analysis, discussion, presentation, or other important aspects.
• Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scientific, ethical, methodological, or scope requirements.

Editors should ensure that the final decision is consistent with the reviewer comments while retaining independent editorial judgment.

• Provide authors with clear and constructive reviewer comments.
• Request authors to respond to substantive reviewer comments.
• Ensure that revisions are adequately addressed before acceptance.
• Send revised manuscripts for additional review when necessary.
• Ensure that major methodological or scientific changes are properly evaluated.
• Maintain a clear record of manuscript revisions and editorial decisions.

Before final publication, editors should ensure that accepted manuscripts have completed the necessary editorial and production processes.

• Confirm that all required revisions have been completed.
• Verify author information and affiliations.
• Check the completeness of references, figures, tables, and supplementary materials.
• Ensure that ethical and disclosure statements are appropriately provided.
• Coordinate copyediting, proofreading, typesetting, and publication procedures.
• Ensure that the final published version accurately reflects the accepted manuscript.

Editors should ensure that authorship is based on substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions to the research.

• Authors should meet recognized authorship criteria.
• All listed authors should have approved the final manuscript.
• Individuals who do not meet authorship criteria should be appropriately acknowledged.
• Changes to the author list after submission should be justified and approved according to journal policy.
• Where applicable, authors should provide a CRediT Authorship Contribution Statement.

Editors should ensure that authors, reviewers, and editorial team members disclose any potential conflict of interest that could influence the research or editorial decision.

• Financial conflicts of interest.
• Professional or institutional relationships.
• Personal relationships.
• Academic or collaborative relationships.
• Commercial or organizational interests.

Editors should take appropriate measures to manage disclosed conflicts and maintain the independence of the editorial process.

• Authors should disclose all sources of financial support for the research.
• Funding statements should identify the funding organization where applicable.
• Editors should ensure that funding information is transparently reported.
• Funding should not influence editorial decisions or peer review.

Editors should establish and consistently apply the journal's policy regarding the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, peer review, and editorial processes.

• Authors should disclose the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies when required by journal policy.
• Generative AI tools should not be listed as authors.
• Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and content of their manuscripts.
• Editors should evaluate whether AI-assisted content introduces fabricated information, inaccurate citations, plagiarism, or other research integrity concerns.
• Editors and reviewers should not upload confidential manuscript content into publicly accessible Generative AI systems unless explicitly permitted by the journal.
• AI tools should not replace the independent editorial judgment of editors or the expert assessment of reviewers.

Any concerns regarding inappropriate or undisclosed use of Generative AI should be handled confidentially and evaluated according to the journal's publication ethics and research integrity policies.

• Editors should investigate credible allegations of research misconduct.
• Potential plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, and unethical research practices should be addressed appropriately.
• Where necessary, editors may request clarification, supporting data, ethical approval documents, or other relevant information from authors.
• Serious ethical concerns should be handled confidentially and in accordance with established publication ethics procedures.
• Corrections, retractions, or other post-publication actions should be considered when reliable evidence indicates that the published record requires correction.

Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity of the published academic record. If significant errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, the journal should respond appropriately.

• Correction: Used when a published article contains an error that does not invalidate the main findings.
• Retraction: Considered when substantial errors, misconduct, unreliable findings, or serious ethical problems affect the validity of the publication.
• Expression of Concern: May be considered when serious concerns exist but an investigation has not yet reached a final conclusion.

Post-publication actions should be transparent and documented appropriately.

• Communicate with authors and reviewers professionally and respectfully.
• Provide clear information regarding editorial decisions and required revisions.
• Maintain confidentiality in all editorial correspondence.
• Respond to reasonable author or reviewer inquiries in a timely manner.
• Avoid language or communication that could be interpreted as discriminatory, threatening, or personally offensive.

• Editorial decisions should be based on academic merit rather than the identity, affiliation, nationality, gender, religion, or personal characteristics of the authors.
• Editors should apply journal policies consistently across manuscripts.
• Editors should maintain independence from commercial or external pressure.
• Editors should avoid decisions influenced by personal relationships or conflicts of interest.
• Decisions should be supported by the scientific evidence and quality of the manuscript.

Important: Editors are responsible for maintaining the fairness, transparency, confidentiality, academic quality, and integrity of the journal's editorial process. All editorial decisions should be made independently and consistently in accordance with the journal's policies and recognized principles of publication ethics.