JINEA applies a Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts. In this process, both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed to minimize bias and maintain impartial assessment. This review system includes:

• Anonymity of Authors and Reviewers: identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.
• Objective Evaluation: manuscripts are assessed solely based on scientific merit, originality, methodology, and contribution to the field.
• Independent Review: reviewers provide unbiased and constructive feedback without knowledge of the authors’ affiliations.
• Ethics and Integrity: the process adheres strictly to publication ethics, confidentiality, and conflict-of-interest policies.
• Editorial Transparency: authors receive clear editorial decisions accompanied by anonymous reviewer comments.

Review Process Stages

• Initial Technical Check: verification of manuscript format, scope alignment, and compliance with ethical standards.
• Editorial Screening: preliminary assessment of relevance, originality, and academic quality.
• Editor Assignment: appointment of a handling editor to manage the review process.
• Reviewer Selection: selection of qualified reviewers with relevant expertise under double-blind conditions.
• Double-Blind Peer Review: reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide anonymous recommendations and comments.
• Author Revision: authors revise the manuscript in response to anonymous reviewer feedback.
• Final Editorial Decision: based on reviewers’ recommendations and revised submission, the decision may be:
  • Accepted without revision
  • Accepted with minor revisions
  • Accepted with major revisions
  • Resubmit for further review
  • Rejected
• Publication: accepted articles undergo copyediting, layout, and are published online in an open-access format for broad dissemination.