Upon submission, the editor or editorial assistant conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript fits the journal's focus and scope. The manuscript is then screened for similarity using iThenticate (via CrossCheck). Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope or contain plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) are rejected at this stage.

JECS maintains a double-blind peer review policy, meaning both the reviewers and the author(s) remain anonymous throughout the review process. Authors are required to anonymize their manuscripts before submission, ensuring that their identity is not revealed in the article's content.

Peer review serves two primary purposes:

• To provide constructive feedback to authors, helping them improve their work to the highest academic standard
• To assist editors in determining the manuscript's suitability for publication

Constructive and Supportive Reviewing: JECS will not accept peer reviews that contain harsh or discriminatory comments, are unduly negative, or reflect undue bias toward a specific ideological or disciplinary position. The journal is committed to supporting scholars, particularly early-career researchers and those who have not benefited from training at elite institutions. Reviewers must provide supportive and constructive criticism aimed at helping authors develop and improve their submissions.

Reviewers are asked to provide their reports in a timely manner to help the journal deliver a high-quality publishing service to the global scientific community. If an extension is needed, reviewers should contact the editorial office.

Assessment Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Alignment with journal's aims, scope, and submission criteria
• Clearly formulated research questions
• Well-defined research components and methodology
• Conclusions justified and supported by results
• Appropriate data presentation and robustness
• Clear structure, subheadings, and coherent argumentation
• Sufficient English language level
• References presented in journal house style, complete and accurate
• Compliance with technical standards and ethical guidelines
• Novelty and overall benefit of publication
• Freedom from fraud, plagiarism, or unethical behavior

Recommendation Categories

• Accept: Manuscript can be published in its current form
• Accept after minor changes: Light revisions required before publication
• Reject and resubmit after major changes: Significant revisions needed; new review round required
• Reject: Paper not suitable for publication in JECS or fundamental issues cannot be resolved

Important Considerations for Reviewers

• If you disagree with the author's opinions but they are consistent with available evidence, allow them to stand
• Use appropriate, respectful language in addressing comments to the author
• Avoid generalized or vague statements; provide specific, actionable feedback
• Avoid negative comments unsupported by arguments
• JECS editors do not edit reviewer comments; reviewers are responsible for their language and tone
• Confidential comments to editors can be made in the designated box on the review form
• When recommending revisions or rejection, provide specific suggestions on how to improve clarity, succinctness, and overall quality