Peer Review

Doctoral Horizons journal uses the "double blind peer-review" system, which implies the anonymity of both authors and reviewers. The editor-in-chief decides to accept/reject the articles based on the reviewers' recommendations.

After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment carried out by the editor-in-chief and/or members of the editorial board. At this stage, the manuscript is evaluated in terms of its relevance to the scope of the publication, compliance with technical and formatting requirements, originality, and adherence to academic and ethical standards. Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum editorial criteria may be returned to the authors for correction or may be rejected before entering the peer-review stage.

In alignment with the journal’s ethical standards, all submitted materials are processed through anti-plagiarism tools available at the UNATC Doctoral School. This proactive measure supports the early identification of concerns related to originality and scholarly ethics. The editorial board clearly communicates its policies regarding plagiarism, authorship, citation practices, and academic responsibility to all contributors. All submissions are required to comply with internationally recognized principles of research integrity and professional ethics.

All manuscripts that successfully pass the preliminary evaluation are subsequently subject to a double-blind peer-review process. This procedure guarantees the anonymity of both authors and reviewers in order to ensure objectivity, impartiality, and academic integrity throughout the evaluation process. Prior to review, all information that could identify the author or authors is removed from the manuscript. Likewise, the identities of the reviewers remain confidential and are not disclosed to the authors.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with recognized expertise in the relevant field of research. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic competence, research experience, and the absence of conflicts of interest. During the evaluation process, reviewers assess the originality and relevance of the contribution, the methodological rigor of the research, the clarity and coherence of the argumentation, the quality of the documentation and references, and the overall scientific value of the manuscript.

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial board may decide to accept the manuscript, request minor or major revisions, or reject the submission. Authors receive the reviewers’ comments together with the editorial decision and, where necessary, are invited to revise their manuscripts accordingly. In situations where the reviewers’ evaluations differ significantly, the manuscript may be submitted to an additional reviewer in order to support a balanced and well-founded editorial decision.

The final decision regarding publication belongs to the editor-in-chief and the editorial board and is made on the basis of the reviewers’ recommendations, the quality of the revised manuscript, and the publication’s academic standards. Accepted articles proceed to the stages of copyediting, proofreading, and final formatting before publication.

Peer reviewers for Doctoral Horizons are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, and ethical integrity, in alignment with international peer review standards and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Potential peer reviewers should inform the editor-in-chief of any possible conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation to review a manuscript, allowing an informed decision about whether or not to invite the potential reviewer to participate in the review process. It also helps to ensure the integrity and transparency of the review process.