Reviewer Guidelines:
Submitted Manuscripts Editorial Procedures:
The following three-stage review process applies to all publications submitted to the International Research Journal of Economics and Management Studies (IRJEMS).
Editorial Review (Stage 1)
The Section Editor will first examine whether the submission is appropriate for the Journal's purpose and whether the research is sound. The manuscript will be rejected if it does not match these conditions.
In the second phase, the author(s) are checked for compliance with the Journal's ethical standards, as well as the paper is tested for plagiarism using the IRJEMS’s technical team supported by the editorial board. The submission will be rejected without going through the peer-review process if the author(s) do not follow the Journal's ethical principles or if plagiarism is discovered.
The Editor assesses if the manuscript has been adequately prepared, assuming it fits the Journal's ethical requirements. If the manuscript has not been properly prepared, it is returned to the author(s) for modifications.
Review (Stage 2)
For a double-blind peer review of the manuscript, the Editor will choose at least two independent specialists. All of the professionals who participated in the double-blind peer review are unpaid volunteers. They have submitted their academic CV to the Journal and have been permitted to review papers within the scope of the Journal by the Editor and Editorial Board. Official reviews, including all comments, are kept private, and only the Author has access to them (s).
The Editor will notify the author(s) that the double-blind peer review process has resulted in one of the following results once both reviewers have submitted their reports:
• The manuscript is accepted in its current state.
• The manuscript has been approved with minimal changes. The author(s) has one week to send the Editor the corrected article.
• The manuscript has been accepted, subject to significant adjustments. The author(s) has one month to send the Editor the updated article.
• The manuscript is rejected with a request to resubmit with significant changes. If one or both reviewers believe the work requires more development and/or research to support the conclusions, they may ask the author to do so (s). If the author(s) decide to go down that path, they are encouraged to resubmit their work, which will be sent back to the same reviewers for further consideration.
• The manuscript is turned down.