Peer Review Procedure

Ethics, Science, Education applies a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review. Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening for relevance to the journal’s scope, thematic focus, and compliance with the technical requirements. Once approved, the manuscript is sent for evaluation by at least two independent experts in the relevant academic field.

It is the responsibility of the reviewers to assess whether the article presents results that are clearly stated and support the conclusions, whether the bibliography is appropriate, and whether the manuscript makes a significant contribution to the field.

Reviewers assess the following aspects:

• The abstract adequately reflects the content of the article
• The thesis is clearly stated
• Previous research is accurately and properly presented
•  Methodology and methods are precisely defined
• Logical structure of the argument
• Clarity and coherence of the conclusion
• Correct citation of sources and references
• Clarity and academic tone of the language
• Appropriate length of the manuscript

Confidentiality and Objectivity

Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and must not share or use the content without explicit permission. Evaluations should be objective and constructive, avoiding any personal criticism or bias.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest related to the authorship or content of the manuscript. If such a conflict exists, the reviewer must decline the invitation to review.

Plagiarism and Ethical Violations

If the reviewer identifies plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data manipulation, or any other form of unethical conduct, they are required to immediately inform the editorial board.

Timelines

The standard time frame for completing a review is up to 3 weeks. If a reviewer is unable to meet this deadline, they should promptly notify the editorial team.

Editorial Decision

After receiving the peer reviews, the editors will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept the manuscript for publication as submitted:
•  Accept with minor revisions, without the need for a second review (comments to be addressed on the copy provided)
• Accept with major revisions, subject to a second review (comments to be addressed on the copy provided)
• Reject the manuscript

If necessary, authors may be invited to submit a revised version, which will undergo a new round of peer review.