Reviewer Guidelines

REVIEWER GUIDELINES

Submitted manuscripts will be reviewed and selected by the Editorial Team based on their relevance to the journal's scope, compliance with the journal’s template and writing guidelines, and overall academic contribution. Articles meeting the initial criteria will be sent for peer review.

 

Evaluation Criteria:

  1. General Assessment
  • Does the article contribute new knowledge or insights in economics, business, management, or accounting?
  • Is the research problem clearly stated and relevant?
  • Does the manuscript align with the journal's scope?
  1. Structure and Presentation
  • Does the manuscript present a coherent argument?
  • Are the ideas clearly conveyed and logically structured?
  1. Title
  • Does the title accurately reflect the content of the article?
  • Is it concise and free from unnecessary abbreviations?
  • If possible, does it indicate the main result or conclusion of the study?
  1. Abstract
  • Does the abstract include:
    1. The purpose of the research;
    2. The methodology used;
    3. The key results or findings;
    4. The main conclusion?
  1. Introduction
  • Clearly explains the background of the study.
  • Provides a literature review that highlights the study’s novelty and identifies gaps in existing research.
  • Clearly defines the research objectives, hypotheses, or problem statement.
  • Justifies the research approach and its significance in the field.
  1. Methodology
  • Is the methodology well-documented and replicable?
  • Are the research methods appropriate and clearly explained?
  • Does the study specify data sources, sample selection, research instruments, and data analysis techniques?
  • Is the approach consistent with the study’s objectives?
  1. Results and Discussion
  • Are the findings clearly presented using tables, charts, or figures where necessary?
  • Are the results analyzed effectively and linked to the research objectives?
  • Does the discussion compare the findings with previous studies or theories?
  • Are the interpretations logical and supported by data?
  • Does the discussion address practical or theoretical implications?
  • Does the author acknowledge the study’s limitations?
  • Are suggestions for future research included?
  1. Conclusion
  • Summarizes key findings in relation to the research objectives.
  • Highlights implications for theory, practice, or policy.
  • Avoids repetition of results and unnecessary details.
  • Written in a paragraph format, not as bullet points.
  1. References
  • Are references current and relevant (preferably from reputable journals)?
  • Does the manuscript follow the required citation style (e.g., APA latest edition) correctly?
  • Are all cited references included in the reference list, and vice versa?

 

Review Decision Categories:

  • Accept Submission – The manuscript meets all quality and relevance criteria with minimal or no revisions.
  • Revisions Required – The manuscript is promising but needs minor modifications.
  • Resubmit for Review – Major revisions are needed, requiring a second review.
  • Resubmit Elsewhere – The manuscript does not fit the journal’s scope but may be suitable for another journal.
  • Decline Submission – The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards.
  • See Comments – Additional reviewer feedback is provided.