Peer Review Policy

1. Introduction

The Journal of Management & Social Science (JMSS) is committed to publishing high-quality research that makes significant contributions to both fields. Ensuring the quality of published work is paramount, and this policy outlines the principles and procedures governing the peer review process at JMSS.

2. Types of Review

JMSS employs a double-blind peer review process. This means that:

  • The identities of authors are masked from reviewers.
  • Reviewers' identities are masked from authors.

This promotes fair and objective evaluation based solely on the merits of the work.

3. Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise in the relevant subject area and proven ability to provide insightful and constructive feedback. JMSS strives to maintain a diverse pool of reviewers representing different geographical locations, research methodologies, and academic perspectives.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Originality and significance: Does the manuscript present a novel contribution to the field? Does it address an important question or problem?
  • Methodology: Is the research design sound and appropriate for the research question? Are the methods clearly described and justified?
  • Analysis and interpretation: Are the data analyzed rigorously and accurately? Are the findings adequately interpreted and supported by the evidence?
  • Structure and clarity: Is the manuscript well-organized and clearly written? Is the argument presented logically and convincingly?
  • Grammar and language: Is the manuscript free of grammatical errors and typos? Does it use clear and concise language appropriate for academic writing.

5. Review Process

  • Authors submit their manuscripts electronically through the JMSS online submission system.
  • The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor conducts an initial screening to ensure the manuscript fits the journal's scope and meets basic formatting requirements.
  • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to two qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's topic.
  • Reviewers are provided with clear guidelines and expected timeframes for completing their reviews.
  • Reviewers submit their evaluations and recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor, who synthesizes the feedback and makes a final decision on the manuscript's fate.

6. Types of Decisions

Based on the reviewers' feedback and the Editor-in-Chief's assessment, the following decisions may be made:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without major revisions.
  • Accept with Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor revisions for clarity, language, or formatting before publication.
  • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant revisions to address weaknesses in methodology, analysis, or interpretation before being reconsidered for publication.
  • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in JMSS due to shortcomings in originality, methodology, or overall quality.

7. Author Communication

Authors are notified of the Editor-in-Chief's decision and provided with detailed feedback from the reviewers, regardless of the outcome. This allows authors to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their work and improve their writing for future submissions.

8. Reviewer Confidentiality

The anonymity of both authors and reviewers is strictly maintained throughout the peer review process. This creates an open and honest environment where reviewers can provide frank and unbiased feedback.

9. Conflict of Interest

Potential reviewers are required to disclose any conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships with the authors or their institutions. The Editor-in-Chief takes appropriate steps to avoid assigning reviewers with potential conflicts to any given manuscript.

10. Ethical Considerations

JMSS upholds the highest ethical standards in research and publication. Reviewers are expected to adhere to ethical guidelines in their evaluation of manuscripts, such as avoiding plagiarism and maintaining confidentiality.

11. Appeals Process

Authors who disagree with the Editor-in-Chief's decision may request an appeal. The Appeal Committee will review the manuscript and the original reviews and make a final decision.

12. Revision

JMSS reserves the right to revise this policy periodically to reflect the evolving needs of the journal and the academic community.

This Peer Review Policy is intended to ensure a fair, rigorous, and transparent peer review process at JMSS. We believe that this process is essential for maintaining the high quality of published work and contributing to the advancement of knowledge in both management and social science.