Peer Review Policy

同行评审制度

---

Double-anonymous (double-blind) peer review

This journal adopts a strict double-anonymous (double-blind) peer review process.

During the review, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.

All author identifiers, including names, affiliations, funding information, contact details, author's biography and acknowledgments, are removed from manuscripts before being sent to reviewers.

Each submission is reviewed by at least two independent peer experts based solely on academic quality, novelty, validity, and methodological soundness.

The review process is conducted objectively, fairly, and transparently to ensure rigorous academic assessment.

Manuscript Anonymization

 

This journal applies double-blind peer review to ensure fairness, impartiality, and objectiveness. To avoid identification bias, authors are required to anonymize identifiable information in the review version:

1. Authors should remove names, affiliations, funding details, acknowledgments, and other directly identifying information.

2. Specific institutions, schools, companies, regions, and project names involved in case studies should be replaced with generic labels (e.g., “University A,” “Company B”) or appropriately anonymized.

3. After formal acceptance, authors may restore real institutional and case information in the published version, provided that written consent has been obtained from relevant parties and no privacy, confidentiality, or sensitive issues are involved.

4. Anonymization supports fair review, complies with publication ethics and open-access standards, and does not compromise research integrity or academic honesty.

双盲同行评审制度

本刊实行严格的双盲同行评审制度（Double-Anonymous Peer Review）。在整个评审过程中，作者与审稿人之间互相不知情、身份完全屏蔽。

编辑部将对所有投稿论文进行去标识化处理，隐去作者姓名、单位、基金项目、联系方式、作者简介、致谢等可识别身份信息，确保审稿人无法获知作者任何背景；同时审稿人身份亦对作者严格保密。

所有稿件均由至少两位同行专家进行独立评审，评审结果以论文学术质量、创新性、科学性与规范性为唯一依据，保障评审过程客观、公正、透明。

 

稿件匿名化处理

 

本期刊实行双盲同行评审制度，为保障评审过程公平、公正、客观，避免身份偏见，要求作者在投稿的评审版本中对可识别身份的信息进行匿名化处理：

1. 作者需隐去作者姓名、单位、基金项目、致谢等可直接识别身份的内容。

2. 案例研究中涉及的具体机构、学校、企业、地区、项目名称等，应使用代称（如“A高校”“B企业”）或模糊化处理。

3. 正式录用后，作者可在最终出版版本中恢复真实机构名称、案例信息，前提是已获得相关主体授权，且不涉及隐私、保密或敏感信息。

4. 匿名化处理旨在维护评审公正性，符合学术伦理与开放获取期刊出版规范，不影响研究真实性与学术诚信。

 

Editorial Board

Global Cases and Practices of Vocational Education

EduTech Press Group Co., Limited

February 24, 2026