Peer review plays a significant role in the publication of scholarly journals through assessment of validity, quality and originality of submitted manuscripts. There are three types of peer review: “open”, “single blind” and “double blind”.
The journal «Innovative Economics and Management» has a "double-blind" review process: authors are not told who reviewed their paper, and referees do not know the name of the authors whose papers they review. The review procedure is fully anonymous.
We strongly recommend that all reviewers get acquainted with and follow COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Submitted articles will be send to reviewers according their stated areas of expertise and experience of the subject matter of the article. They may be selected from the editorial Board of the journal as well as from elsewhere. The article is sent to one or two reviewers in the related study field. Reviewers complete their reviews on a special form.
peer review process
1. After the acceptance, the article will be sent to the assistant editors, who will check it for the outlined requirements, structure, and design of articles.
2. After the successful completion of the first stage, the paper will be checked for relevance and compliance with the journal's thematic areas by the members of the Editorial Committee.
3. On the next step paper will be sent to reviewers who determines its potential interest for readers, importance and relevance for scientists. Also, a reviewer assesses correspondence of the manuscript to journal's scope.
4. Peer review results in evaluation and critique that help author make improvements to their manuscripts and, importantly, help the editor decide if the paper should be accepted for publishing in the journal.
5. if required, a second, additional reviewer will be involved. In the case of disagreement between the two reviews, the paper will be forwarded to a third expert, whose review will determine whether it will be published or not.
The review forms are returned to the editorial board within 30-35 days of receipt of the material. In the event of delays in returning the reviews, the reviewer will inform the editorial board by e-mail. If the reviewer has any questions, comments or requests, they will contact the editors.
According to results of reviewing the article can be published unchanged or with minor changes recommended by the reviewer, returned to the author(s) with recommendations for significant revisions and subsequently re-reviewed, or rejected. The rejected articles will not be considered again for review. For accepted articles, authors will be requested to revise the text, and minor changes, and submit the paper within 10 days.
Following consideration of the reviewers' recommendations after the reviewing The Editorial Board will make one of the following actions:
As soon as they are ready, accepted articles will be published in the journal.
The paper may be rejected without review if:
The paper does not meet the journal's scientific direction;
The formatting of the article does not meet the outlined requirements, structure and the design.
The manuscript does not comply with the ethics of publication.
The author has the right to appeal the decision of the editorial board if she/he thinks that her/his work misunderstood by the reviewers.
If the author is not satisfied with the editor's response to the complaint, she/he can appeal to the Chief Editorial Board.
If you have any questions about the reviewing process, please feel free to contact us.