A	Editor’s Responsibilities
A.1.	Publication Decisions	The editor-in-chief is ultimately responsible for publishing the article in the journal. The validity of the paper and its attractiveness to researchers are the most important factors for influencing editor-in-chief decision making. In addition, the editor-in-chief may be guided on this decision in accordance with the policies adopted by the editorial board and the legal requirements and copyright laws, and also, consult with other reviewers and editors.
A.2.	Peer Review Process	Articles submitted to the journal are first reviewed by the editor or their successors. The article may be rejected at the outset because it is inconsistent with the topic of the journal or its poor quality (both literary and thematic). If the article is approved by the editor at this stage, it will be sent to three expert reviewers on subject of article. These reviewers are unknown to each other. The reviewers evaluate the paper based on scientific and literary quality and declare the result as "accept without change or reject and or accepted with minor/major revisions”. Finally, the editor review the results of all reviews and sends his/her final opinion to the authors.
A.3.	Fair Play	The editor evaluates articles based on his/her intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, intellectual affiliation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political affiliation. The editor's decision to accept or reject an article is based solely on the importance, authenticity and clarity of the article and its relevance to the purpose of the journal.
A.4.	Confidentiality	The editor and any member of editorial board do not share any article information with anyone other than the authors, reviewers, and publisher. The content of the arbitration process will also be kept confidential.
A.5.	Disclosure and Conflict of Interest	The articles that are in the process of being reviewed and not published should never be used by the editor without the written consent of the authors.  The information and ideas obtained from these articles should be kept confidential and the editor and his / her successors should not use it personally. The editor or its successors should refrain from evaluating articles in which they may have a personal or group interest and delegate this task to other staff or members of the editorial board. The editor will also send an article to the reviewer, asking him/her to openly discuss with the editor any potential conflict of interest that may affect his/her arbitration results, and that the editor may change the reviewer, and elect a new reviewer.
A.6.	Providing Guidance	Providing guidance to guest editors, authors, and reviewers on everything that they are expected to consider in a peer review processes.
A.7.	Appropriate Reviewers	Ensure that the reviewers are properly selected.
A.8.	Developing and Maintaining a Database of Suitable Reviewers	Creating and maintaining a database of qualified reviewers and updating it based on their performance reviews
A.9.	Respect of Reviewer Anonymity	The system that communicates between authors and reviewers should pay attention to the anonymity of the reviewer and the names of the reviewers should not be disclosed to the authors neither in the reviewing text nor anywhere else.
A.10.	Editorial Board	The editorial board should consist of well-known researchers considering the fields of the journal. The editor-in-chief should include the full name of the editorial board and their affiliations on the journal's website.