Contrarius Journal maintains the standards of double-blind peer review while increasing the efficiency of the process. All research articles published in the Contrarius journal undergo full peer review, key characteristics of which are listed below:

1. Contrarius is applying a two-stage process: After the technical check, your submission will first be reviewed by the editorial team for publication suitability in the journal. If suitable, it will then be assigned to an editor to handle the review and decision process.
2. If your manuscript matches the scope and satisfies the criteria of Contrarius, your paper will be assigned to an editor. The editor will identify and contact reviewers who are acknowledged experts in the field. Since peer review is a voluntary service, it can take some time. Please be assured that the editor will regularly remind reviewers who do not reply in a timely manner. During this stage, the status will appear as "Under Review".
3. Once the editor has received the minimum number of expert reviews, the status will change to "Required Reviews Complete".
4. It is also possible that the editor may decide that your manuscript does not meet the journal criteria or scope and that it should not be considered further. In this case, the editor will immediately notify you that the manuscript has been rejected and may recommend a more suitable journal.

Peer review of referred papers:

Editors of the Contrarius journal will decide promptly whether to accept, reject, or request revisions of referred papers based on the reviews and editorial insight of the supporting journals. Also, editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. The authors will be advised when the editors decide that further review is required. Submitted articles will first be reviewed by the editor for the topic and writing style according to the guidelines. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review; the reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence. In short, the steps are:

1. Manuscript Submission (by author).
2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors). 
3. Editors have a right to directly accept, reject, or review. Before further processing, each manuscript undergoes a plagiarism check using Turnitin.
4. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers).
5. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers' comments).
6. Paper Revision (by author)
7. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with a similar flow to point number 1. 
8. If the reviewer seems to be satisfied with the revision, there will be a notification for acceptance (by the editor). 
9. Galley proof and publishing process.

The steps numbered 1 to 5 constitute 1 round of the peer-reviewing process (see the grey area in the figure). The editor or the editorial board considers the peer reviewers' feedback and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions:

1. Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form.
2. Accepted with minor revisions, the journal will publish the paper and ask the author to make small corrections (let the author revise within the stipulated time).
3. Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revise within the stipulated time).
4. Resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision-making after the authors make major changes.
5. Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.