Peer Reviewer Process

All submissions to Psympathic undergo a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the quality and validity of the published research. The journal operates a double-blind peer review process, meaning that the authors and the reviewers are anonymous. The review process is carried out by experts in the relevant fields of study, who evaluate the submitted manuscripts based on their scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal's scope.

1. Article Submission
Authors are required to submit their manuscripts through the online submission system provided by the journal. The manuscript will undergo an initial review by the editorial team to ensure that it aligns with the journal's scope and submission guidelines.

2. Initial Editorial Review
Upon submission, the journal editor will conduct an initial evaluation to assess the manuscripts alignment with the journal's topics, writing quality, and adherence to the submission guidelines. If the manuscript meets the established criteria, it will proceed to the peer review stage.

3. Reviewer Selection
The editor will select three or more reviewers who possess relevant expertise in the field related to the submitted article. Reviewers are independent experts who are not involved in the research presented in the manuscript.

4. Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers will evaluate the manuscript based on several criteria, including:

Scientific Quality: Originality, contribution to existing knowledge, research methodology, and the validity and reliability of the research findings.
Structure and Presentation: Adherence to the journal's submission guidelines, clarity of presentation, and overall organization of the article.
Relevance and Significance: The relevance and potential impact of the research on the respective field of study.
Weaknesses or Potential Improvements: Suggestions for improvements, clarifications, or additions that could strengthen the article.

5. Feedback and Editorial Decision
After the review process is completed, reviewers will provide feedback in the form of comments and recommendations, which will be communicated to the authors. Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the provided feedback. The editor will then make a decision based on the review results: accepted, accepted with minor revisions, accepted with major revisions, or rejected.

6. Author Revisions
Authors must address all comments and revisions provided by the reviewers and editors. If any part of the feedback is unclear, authors may communicate with the editor for further clarification.

7. Acceptance and Publication
Once the revisions are made and the manuscript is approved by the editor, it will proceed to the next stage for publication in the appropriate journal issue. Accepted articles will undergo final editing and formatting before being published.