All manuscripts submitted to Research in Education and Rehabilitation are considered for publication on the understanding that they have not been previously published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

All manuscripts are submitted through the journal's online submission system. Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to assess its compliance with the journal's aims and scope, author guidelines, ethical standards, and basic requirements for scientific quality and originality. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected by the Editor-in-Chief without external peer review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are subjected to a double-blind peer review process. Before a manuscript is sent to reviewers, the Editorial Office removes all information that directly identifies the authors. The identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the peer-review process.

Research articles are evaluated by independent external reviewers with relevant expertise in the subject area. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic expertise and are expected to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. Additional reviewers may be invited when further expert assessment is considered necessary.

The peer-review process consists of the following steps:

1. Submission of the Manuscript
The corresponding author submits the manuscript through the journal's online submission system.

2. Initial Editorial Screening
The Editorial Office checks the manuscript for compliance with the journal's aims and scope, Author Guidelines, ethical requirements, and submission standards.

3. Assessment by the Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief assesses the manuscript's suitability, originality, scientific relevance, and overall quality. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

4. Selection and Invitation of Reviewers
Manuscripts considered suitable for further evaluation are sent to independent external reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant field. Additional reviewers may be invited when necessary.

5. Reviewers' Assessment
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript with regard to its scientific quality, originality, methodology, clarity, relevance, ethical standards, and contribution to the field. They provide comments and recommendations to the Editor.

6. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editor may reach one of the following decisions: accept the manuscript, request minor revisions, request major revisions, or reject the manuscript. When reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the Editor may invite an additional independent reviewer before making a final decision.

7. Revision
When revisions are requested, the authors are expected to address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised manuscript together with a response to the reviewers. The revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

8. Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection, taking into consideration the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' revisions, and compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical standards.

9. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest
All manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process for personal advantage and must disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.