New Editorial Policy: no more than three rounds of peer review per manuscript

Dear colleagues,
We are committed to ensuring that the peer-review process in our journal remains not only rigorous, but also respectful and comfortable for all participants — authors, editors, and reviewers alike. To support this goal, we are introducing a new policy: no more than three rounds of peer review per manuscript.

We believe that three rounds are sufficient for constructive scientific dialogue and for achieving a high-quality revised manuscript. We therefore count on authors to address reviewers' and editors' comments carefully from the very first round, and on editors to provide clear, comprehensive guidance that helps move the manuscript toward publication without unnecessary cycles of revision.

If authors encounter difficulties in interpreting editorial or reviewer comments — for example, if remarks are unclear or internally inconsistent and this prevents timely and high-quality revision — we ask that you contact the editorial office immediately. We will help clarify the issues and work toward a solution to ensure that the dialogue remains productive.

Please note that a fourth and any subsequent rounds of peer review (in cases where they result from systematic failure to address comments or from inadequate revision by the authors) will be carried out at the authors’ expense.

This policy comes into effect as of today and does not apply to manuscripts currently under review. However, where possible, we will strive to adhere to these principles when handling ongoing submissions as well.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation!