1. Peer Review Policy

This journal adopts a three-step review process, involving initial review by the responsible editor, external peer review (including statistical review for relevant manuscripts), and final review by the editor-in-chief and associate editor-in-chief. The peer review process is single-blind, and the acceptance rate is approximately 15%. The manuscript handling process is as follows:

1) Initial Review: After submission, the editorial staff uses the Academic Misconduct Literature Checking System (AMLC) from CNKI to test the repetition rate of a manuscript. Manuscripts pass the test will undergo an initial review by the responsible editor within 3 working days. This step focuses on assessing whether the manuscript adheres to academic ethics, aligns with the journal's publishing objectives and scope. A manuscript with a repetition rate exceeding 30%, or with problems like unclear arguments, logical confusion, inaccurate e x p r e s s i o n, lack of readability, and non-compliance with formatting standards may be rejected or suggested for submission to other journals.

2) External Peer Review: Manuscripts passed the initial review will undergo peer review by 2-3 external experts who mainly evaluate the manuscript's innovativeness, academic rigor, scientific quality, adherence to research ethics, and compliance with academic standards. The review is usually completed within 2-3 weeks, with feedback provided to both the responsible editor and the author. In case of conflicting opinions among external reviewers, a majority decision is considered, or an additional reviewer may be consulted. If two or more reviewers recommend rejection, the responsible editor would reject the manuscript. Reviewers are experts in relevant fields and have no conflicts of interest with the authors or project team. Authors are required to submit revised manuscripts and explanations within the specified time based on peer review and initial review feedback. Manuscripts requiring re-review by external experts after author revisions will be re-submitted by the responsible editor.

3) Statistical Review: If the statistical methods exceed the expertise of the responsible editor, a statistical expert will be assigned to review the manuscript, and original data may be requested for verification.

4) Final Review: Manuscripts approved through peer review will undergo a final review by the Editor-in-Chief and associate Editor-in-Chief, focusing on political and academic issues and overall manuscript quality. The Editor-in-Chief will organize a final review meeting to determine the final acceptance of the manuscript.

(Note: While in a few cases the review may exceed the designated review time, generally, the entire process from submission to final approval does not exceed 3 months.)

5) Final Editing: Manuscripts accepted for publication will be edited by full-time editors, focusing on the logic, organization, standardization and readability of the manuscripts. The author may revise the manuscripts for several times. The time for each revision is limited to 7 days. If it is necessary to delay the submission of the revised manuscript under special circumstances, the author shall contact the editorial office. Otherwise, the manuscript will be rejected.

6) Proofreading: The edited manuscripts will be typeset and proofread for three times.

7) Publication: The proofs will be read and signed consent of printing by the Editor-in-Chief, and the digital version is sent to data platforms such as CNKI and Wanfang Data. The print version is produced by the printing press and published on the 10th of each month.

2. Review of Submissions by Editors/Editorial Board Members/Guest Editors:

Submissions by journal editors, Editorial Board Members, and Guest Editors must adhere to the same review and editorial procedures as other submissions. Peer reviews must be conducted independently of the related editors/Editorial Board Members/Guest Editors and their research groups. They shall not participate in the review of manuscripts written by themselves, their family members, colleagues, or other authors with whom they have a conflict of interest.

3. Appeals and Feedback

Authors who disagree with the review comments or results can submit a written appeal to the editorial office via the journal's email. Authors are required to provide detailed explanations and clarifications for each review comment. The editorial office will p r o m p t l y review the appeal and provide feedback to the authors. Additionally, readers or authors with feedback or comments on the journal's articles can send their input to the journal's email. The editorial office will process and, as appropriate, provide feedback on the received comments. The journal encourages active supervision and mutual feedback from readers and authors to foster a positive academic atmosphere.

4. Academic Misconduct Detection and Handling

To minimize academic misconduct, the editorial office employs the 'Academic Misconduct Literature Checking System (AMLC)' provided by CNKI for plagiarism detection during the initial review stage. The similarity rate should be below 30%. If any academic misconduct is identified, the manuscript will be rejected, and the incident will be reported to peer journals.

5. Corrections and Retractions

The journal generally does not make corrections or retractions to published articles. However, in necessary circumstances, corrections or retractions may be applied:

- Corrections: If unintentional scientific errors are discovered in a published article that does not significantly impact the results and conclusions, the editorial office will p r o m p t l y publish a correction notice in the journal. The notice will detail the changes made to the original article, and the updated version will be published with the modifications explained, along with the publication date. The pre-modification version will also be archived, and readers can access it directly. When citing, please reference the latest version of the article.

- Retractions: The journal will retract a published article under the following circumstances: 1) severe scientific errors within the article leading to unreliable results and conclusions; 2) confirmed cases of plagiarism, duplicate submission, or violations of ethical norms. In such cases, the editorial office will issue a retraction statement published in both the print and online versions of the journal, indicating the retraction of all parts (abstract, full text, etc.) and all versions of the retracted article. Ensuring the completeness and clarity of the retraction statement, an agreement will be reached with all authors on its content to safeguard the interests of all parties. In cases where an agreement on the retraction statement cannot be reached with the authors, but sufficient evidence indicates the need for retraction, the journal will p r o m p t l y publish the retraction statement and retain the final decision-making authority.