Paper Review Policy

• Originality of Question: Is the study question original and it is well defined?
• Advancement of Knowledge: Do the results provide an advance in current knowledge?
• Quality of Presentation: Is the paper written in an appropriate way?
• Scientific Soundness: Has the study followed the scientific method correctly?
• Technical Soundness: Is the paper technically written?
• Interest to the Readers: Are the conclusions interesting to the readers?
• Widely Accepted: Will the paper attract a wide readership?
• Overall Popularity: Is there an overall benefit to publishing this work?
• Current Knowledge: Does the work provide an advance towards current knowledge?
• Language: Is the  language appropriate and understandable?

Review Process 

-Initial Check by Editorial Office – Staff verify given format, scope adherence, and basic requirements (e.g., originality, plagiarism check).

-Editorial Assessment – The editor evaluates whether the paper fits the journal and is of sufficient quality to proceed.

-Peer Reviewer Selection – The editor invites experts in the field to review the manuscript.

-Peer Review – Reviewers evaluate the manuscript, typically producing a report with comments to the author and a recommendation (e.g., accept, minor revisions, major revisions, reject).

-Editorial Decision – Based on reviewer reports and their own assessment, the editor makes a preliminary decision.

-Author Revision – If revisions are requested, the author modifies the manuscript and resubmits.

-Final Evaluation – The editor (or reviewers, if re-review is needed) assesses the revised version.

Manuscripts submitted to UCC conferences should meet the highest standards of publication ethics:

• Manuscripts have not been submitted or published before, even in part.
• Manuscripts must be original and should not reuse text from another source without appropriate citation.
• The study should have been carried out in accordance with generally accepted ethical research standards.