Double-Blind Review: Concordia employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation. Research and review articles are submitted to at least two subject-matter experts, who provide independent assessments. In the event of conflicting evaluations, a third reviewer will be appointed to resolve discrepancies and provide a final recommendation.

Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers assess submissions based on several key factors, including the relevance and timeliness of the research topic, its contribution to the field, theoretical robustness, mastery of the current literature, methodological rigor, and the significance of the discussion and conclusions. All evaluations must be submitted using the standardized format provided by Concordia.

Confidentiality: Concordia guarantees the confidentiality of all data pertaining to authors and reviewers. The disclosure of details and results from the review process is strictly limited to the parties directly involved (authors, reviewers, and editors). To maintain the integrity of the blind review, authors are urged to avoid excessive self-citation and ensure that no identifying information is included within the manuscript text.

Review Timeline: The peer review process, encompassing the invitation of experts, their acceptance, and the submission of formal reports, typically averages between 90 and 120 days. However, authors should note that this timeframe may vary due to factors such as reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, or other administrative circumstances that may affect the speed of the process.

Editorial Decision: Concordia will issue an official notification to the authors only after a formal editorial decision has been reached. Possible outcomes include: Acceptance without modifications, Acceptance with minor or major revisions, or Rejection.

Review Process: When revisions are required, authors are granted a period of three to five weeks to incorporate the reviewers' recommendations. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by an anonymous response letter (rebuttal letter) addressed to each reviewer, detailing the nature of the changes made and how each comment for improvement was addressed.