Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
JoMEAR applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, academic integrity, and relevance of every manuscript considered for publication.
Overview
The Journal of Management, Economics, and Accounting Research (JoMEAR) uses a structured peer review procedure to evaluate submitted manuscripts. The review process considers the manuscript's originality, methodological soundness, theoretical contribution, relevance to the journal's scope, clarity of presentation, and compliance with publication ethics.
Each manuscript is evaluated by qualified reviewers with relevant expertise. The journal aims to maintain an objective, fair, confidential, and academically rigorous review process.
Review Model
JoMEAR applies a Double-Blind Peer Review model. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process, where technically and practically applicable.
Peer Review Workflow
Initial Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the JoMEAR online submission system. The submission must comply with the journal's author guidelines and publication requirements.
Editorial Screening
The editorial team checks the manuscript for scope, completeness, basic academic quality, formatting, plagiarism or similarity concerns, and compliance with journal policies.
Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers whose expertise is relevant to the manuscript. Reviewers are expected to disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment.
Peer Review
Reviewers independently evaluate the manuscript based on originality, relevance, theoretical foundation, methodology, analysis, results, discussion, conclusions, references, presentation quality, and ethical considerations.
Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editor's independent assessment, the manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
Revision
Authors are required to respond to reviewer comments and revise the manuscript where necessary. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when further evaluation is considered necessary.
Final Acceptance & Publication
Once the manuscript satisfies the editorial and peer-review requirements, the editor may issue a final acceptance. Accepted articles proceed through copyediting, layout, metadata verification, DOI registration, and online publication.
Reviewer Evaluation Criteria
Novelty and originality of the research contribution.
Appropriateness and rigor of the research methods.
Significance of the findings for scholarship and practice.
Organization, readability, and quality of academic writing.
Relevance, adequacy, and scholarly quality of references.
Compliance with ethical and responsible research practices.
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Maintain confidentiality of the manuscript and review materials.
- Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
- Identify significant methodological or scholarly concerns.
- Declare any actual or potential conflict of interest.
- Identify relevant publications that may strengthen the manuscript where appropriate.
- Avoid using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
- Complete the review within the agreed review period whenever possible.
Author Responsibilities During Review
- Respond professionally and systematically to reviewer comments.
- Provide a clear explanation of revisions made to the manuscript.
- Justify scientifically any reviewer recommendation that is not adopted.
- Submit revised files within the deadline specified by the editorial office.
- Ensure that the revised manuscript remains consistent with journal policies.
Confidentiality, Fairness & Editorial Independence
All manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose manuscript content or review information to unauthorized persons. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly quality, relevance, methodological rigor, and compliance with journal policies rather than personal, institutional, political, or commercial considerations.
JoMEAR does not guarantee acceptance based on reviewer recommendation alone. The final publication decision remains the responsibility of the journal's editorial team.
Review Timeline
The duration of peer review may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements, and editorial workload. Authors can monitor the status of their submission through the JoMEAR online journal system.
