AND adopts the double-blind peer review process. Reviewers are chosen based on their specific expertise.
In particular, articles published in scientific journals commonly undergo submission, acceptance and peer review procedures within the relevant scientific communities.
Generally speaking, peer review ensures a sort of "verification of the level of quality" through a system of "peer" self-assessment entrusted to anonymous researchers (referees) within the scientific community of reference who read and propose, if necessary, suggestions for revising other researchers' contributions.
The editors then submit each article (without indicating the author's name) to two anonymous referees as readers for peer review.
The summary review reports resulting from the peer review are sent to the journal's editors and forwarded to the authors without disclosing the identity of the referees.


Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript according to the following criteria: 

• Originality
• Relevance to journal's aims and scope
• Cultural and technical merit and validity
• Soundness of methodology
• Completeness of the reported work
• Conclusions supported by the data
• Correct acknowledgement of the work of others through reference
• Effectiveness of the manuscript (organization and writing)
• Clarity of tables, graphs, and illustrations

If the reviewers accept the article with significant revisions, the author(s) are invited to improve it based on their suggestions. The revised paper will then be submitted for further review.
After collecting the reviewers' reports, the editors recommend the article's acceptability to the editor-in-chief.


The referencing system consists of the following steps:

Receipt: The editors will receive files containing the proposed articles at the email address indicated in the call. The journal editors and issue editors are in charge of starting the referencing process by sorting the articles for the reviewers. For communications regarding the procedure's progress, the editors will refer to the email address of the author from whom the proposal arrived.

First and second evaluations: made by anonymous reviewers chosen from among PhDs, researchers, and tenured university professors specializing in the subjects in the subject matter of the call for papers. Opinions are rendered based on content and formal criteria by asking the reviewer to fill out the journal’s reference form. Where necessary, in the judgment of the second reviewers and when it is necessary to select a specific number of contributions, articles may be submitted to a third and unquestionable opinion.

Third opinion: will be rendered by university professors who are specialists in the subjects in the subject matter of the call for papers, based on content and formal criteria. The opinion of the third reviewer will be unquestionable for the purpose of acceptance of the contribution.

The reviewers will send the referees' opinions to the editor in writing. The editors of the issue will contact the authors at the email address of receipt, indicating to them the outcome of the review (with opinion accepted/accepted with a request for revisions/not accepted), complete with the anonymous summary judgments of the two or three reviewers and the dates of receipt of the judgments.
According to the reviewers' advice, the authors of contributions may be asked to make editorial or content changes that do not affect the originality of the papers.
Accepted contributions will be published in AND.
The reviewers‘ opinions will be communicated (both for accepted and unaccepted contributions) in an exclusively private form to the authors’ e-mail address.