Peer Review

All manuscripts submitted to Folia Orientalia undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process.

Following submission, each manuscript is first assessed by the Editors-in-Chief and the Scientific Secretary to determine whether it falls within the journal's scope and meets the required scholarly and editorial standards. Manuscripts that do not satisfy these criteria may be rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant field for double-blind peer review. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the originality, scholarly quality, methodological soundness, and significance of the submitted manuscript, and to provide a clear recommendation regarding its publication. Their reports form the basis for the editorial decision.

On the basis of the reviewers' reports, the Editors-in-Chief may decide to:

• accept the manuscript for publication;
• accept the manuscript subject to minor revisions;
• invite the authors to submit a revised version for further consideration;
• reject the manuscript.

Where the reviewers' recommendations differ substantially or the editorial board considers that further expert opinion is required, the manuscript may be referred to one or more additional reviewers.

The Editors-in-Chief are responsible for the final decision on all submitted manuscripts.

For further information on the responsibilities of authors, reviewers and editors, please refer to the Publication Ethics.