Submissions

Author Guidelines

Article Originality

The paper must be an original work, which means it has not been published in another peer-reviewed journal. We accept final versions of articles whose preliminary versions have been accepted and published at a conference, since peer-review and contribution are part of the refinement process for academic articles.

Article length and text requirements

The full text of the article should have 5000-8000 words, including references, 12, 1,5 spaced, Times New Roman

The manuscript should contain:

• an abstract with up to 150 words;
• 3-5 keywords related to the article.

The article's text must include an introduction, a conclusion, and references as compulsory elements.

References and in-text citations must use APA Citation Style.

Please use the template provided to help you out.

Articles can be written in co-authorship (up to 4 authors).

International co-authorship is mostly welcome.

At least one author must have a Ph.D. or an equivalent academic degree.

Large Language Models (LLMs), including tools such as ChatGPT, do not meet the journal's authorship criteria. Authorship implies intellectual contribution, accountability, and responsibility for the integrity, accuracy, and originality of the work, all of which must be attributable to identifiable natural persons. As LLMs cannot assume legal, ethical, or academic responsibility, they cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Any use of LLMs is therefore limited to auxiliary functions (such as linguistic or stylistic assistance) and must be transparently disclosed, with full responsibility remaining with the human author(s).

Artificial Intelligence Use Statement

Where generative AI or AI-assisted technologies have been used in the preparation of a manuscript, authors must include a dedicated declaration at the end of the article, before the references. The statement should identify the tool(s) used, the purpose of use, and the manner in which they were applied. Use confined to improving the readability and language of the work must still be disclosed. Authors must not list AI tools as authors, and must take full responsibility for the content of their manuscript, including any portion produced with the assistance of such tools, ensuring its accuracy, integrity, and originality. Where no generative AI or AI-assisted technologies have been used, authors should state this explicitly. This requirement does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, or references.

Submission Files

To preserve the integrity of the double-blind review process, authors must submit two separate files:

• An anonymized manuscript, representing the final version of the article, with all information identifying the author(s) removed. This includes author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and any self-identifying references in the text, citations, or document properties.
• A separate title page, containing the article title and, for each author: full name, affiliation, postal address (for editorial use), phone number (for editorial use), ORCID iD, and a short biographical note.

Author contributions

For transparency, we encourage authors to submit an author statement file outlining their contributions to the paper using the relevant CRediT roles (Contributor Roles Taxonomy: see at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/leap.1210): Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Resources; Software; Supervision; Validation; Visualization; Roles/Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing. Authorship statements should be formatted with the names of authors first and CRediT role(s) following.

Peer Review Policy and Statement

The journal operates a double-blind peer review process, overseen by the editorial team to ensure academic rigor, impartiality, transparency, and efficiency.

All submissions undergo an initial editorial desk review to assess compliance with the journal's aims and scope, originality, ethical standards, and author guidelines. Manuscripts that meet these minimum criteria proceed to peer review; those that do not may be desk-rejected at this stage.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers, selected for their subject-matter expertise. Throughout the double-blind process, the identities of authors and reviewers are mutually concealed. The reviewers assess the manuscript's scholarly contribution, originality, methodological soundness, and relevance to the field.

In addition to the external reviews, the handling editor conducts an editorial assessment of coherence, clarity, citation standards, and compliance with ethical and editorial requirements, and is responsible for the final decision. Editorial tools, including AI-assisted analysis, may be used in a supportive capacity to enhance quality control, consistency, and integrity checks, without replacing human editorial judgment.

Based on the reviewer reports and editorial assessment, manuscripts may be:

• accepted without revision;
• accepted subject to minor or major revisions; or
• rejected due to substantive deficiencies.

When revisions are required, authors must submit a revised manuscript that addresses all reviewer and editorial comments, along with a response detailing how each point was addressed. Revised submissions are reassessed before a final editorial decision is made.

All editors and reviewers must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest prior to participation in the review process. Individuals with conflicts related to the authors, institutions, funding sources, or subject matter are excluded to preserve independence and impartiality.

The journal aims to ensure an efficient review process. The initial desk review is typically completed within 7–10 days, peer review reports are generally returned within 3–4 weeks, and authors are usually granted 2–4 weeks to complete revisions, depending on the scope.

Special issues will undergo the same peer review standards.