The journal implements a single-blind peer review and three-stage evaluation system. The workflow follows the sequence of "Pre-review by editors - Peer-Review by at least 2 experts - Final decision by the Editor-in-Chief."
(1) Paper registration & Detection of academic misconduct: Upon Paper registration, submissions undergo a Detection of academic misconduct. Manuscripts that Fail this stage face immediate Rejection, while those that Pass proceed to the Pre-review.
(2) Pre-review: During the Pre-review stage, the handling editor may request a Revision (Revise/Back). If the manuscript Fails, it is met with Rejection. Qualified manuscripts (Pass) enter the next stage for Peer-Review by at least 2 experts.
(3) Peer-Review and Re-Review: Manuscripts are evaluated by external reviewers based on academic quality. Authors may be asked for a Revision (Revise/Back).
l If the manuscript Passes, it goes directly to the Final decision.
l If it Fails, it undergoes a Re-Review by editor. If the editor agrees with the negative outcome (Agree), it leads to a Rejection.
l In case of Different views, the manuscript is sent for a Re-Review by 1–2 experts. If 1 fails, it results in a Rejection; if it passes (Pass), it is forwarded to the Final decision.
(4) Final decision & Publication process: The Editor-in-Chief makes the Final decision based on the comprehensive review reports. Manuscripts that Fail are issued a Rejection. For those that Pass, the manuscript proceeds smoothly through the remaining publication pipeline: Arrange for publication date—Editing—Typesetting—Thrice proofreading, author check—Proofreading—Online publication—Printing, sending sample books and remuneration.