Peer Preview Process

The Peer Review Process is a stage where the International Journal of Economics, Finance and Banking Issues (IJEFBI) evaluates the quality of manuscripts before publication. Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by experts in the relevant field to provide feedback and recommendations. This process aims to assist editors in determining whether a manuscript is suitable for publication.

Key Points in the Peer Review Process:

  • Manuscripts submitted to the journal are first screened by the editorial team.

  • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two peer reviewers for evaluation.

  • Peer reviewers independently provide recommendations to the editor, whether the manuscript should be rejected, accepted, or revised.

  • The journal editor considers all reviewer feedback before making a final decision.

The Peer Review Process in IJEFBI functions as a quality control mechanism to ensure that published manuscripts meet academic standards. Reviewers do not make the final publication decision; instead, they provide recommendations. The authority to decide lies solely with the editor or the editorial board.

How Does It Work?

When a manuscript is submitted to IJEFBI, it is assessed to ensure that it meets submission requirements. If suitable, the editorial team selects qualified reviewers in the relevant research field to evaluate the manuscript and provide recommendations.

IJEFBI applies four types of peer review:

  1. Single-blind: Reviewers know the identity of the author, but the author does not know the identity of the reviewer.

  2. Double-blind: Neither the reviewer nor the author knows each other’s identity.

  3. Open peer review: Both the reviewer and the author know each other’s identity. If the article is accepted, signed review reports may be published alongside the article.

  4. Transparent peer review: Reviewers know the identity of the author, but the author does not know the reviewer’s identity unless the reviewer chooses to disclose it. If the article is accepted, anonymous review reports may be published alongside the article.

Why Peer Review?

Peer review is an integral part of scholarly publishing that ensures the validity of manuscripts. Reviewers are experts who contribute their time and expertise to help improve the manuscripts they evaluate.

Peer Review Steps in IJEFBI

  1. Manuscript Submission
    Authors submit manuscripts to IJEFBI through the online submission system or the official journal email.

  2. Initial Editorial Screening
    The editorial team checks the manuscript to ensure it follows the journal’s template and submission requirements. The quality of content is not assessed at this stage.

  3. Evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief
    The Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether the manuscript fits the journal’s focus and scope, is sufficiently original, and makes a meaningful contribution. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.

  4. Reviewer Invitation
    The editor invites reviewers who have expertise relevant to the manuscript topic.

  5. Reviewer Response
    Invited reviewers consider the request based on their expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and availability. If declining, they may suggest an alternative reviewer.

  6. Review Process
    Reviewers thoroughly read the manuscript, make notes, and prepare a detailed review report with recommendations (accept, reject, or revise).

  7. Evaluation of Reviews
    The editor considers all returned reviews before making a final decision. If reviewer opinions differ significantly, additional reviewers may be invited.

  8. Editorial Decision
    The editor communicates the decision to the author along with relevant reviewer comments.

  9. Next Steps

    • If accepted, the manuscript proceeds to production.

    • If revisions are required, the author is asked to improve the manuscript according to reviewer feedback.

    • If rejected, the author may resubmit a substantially revised version as a new submission.

Reviewers are also notified about the final outcome of the manuscripts they reviewed.