Peer Review

Advances in Business Research International Journal (ABRIJ) adopts a rigorous double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts. In this process, both author and reviewer identities are kept confidential to ensure impartiality, objectivity, and fairness in evaluation.

COPE’s Ethical Framework: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers:
https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers

Initial Editorial Screening

All manuscripts are first screened by the Editorial Team to ensure they:

  • Fit within the scope and aims of the journal;
  • Adhere to ABRIJ formatting, referencing, and ethical guidelines;
  • Demonstrate sufficient originality, relevance, and scholarly merit.

Submissions that fail to meet these basic criteria may be desk-rejected without external review.

Review Process Overview

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. The typical review process may take up to three (3) months and follows these steps:

Step 1: Editorial Appraisal

The Editor-in-Chief (EiC) assesses the manuscript for compliance with the Guide for Authors—including structure, clarity, completeness, language quality, and ethical declarations. Manuscripts lacking originality, clarity, or journal relevance may be declined at this stage.

Step 2: Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, experience, and absence of conflicts of interest. In some cases, the EiC may consult the editorial board for reviewer recommendations.

Step 3: Reviewer Acceptance

Invited reviewers confirm their ability to complete the review within the stipulated timeframe and declare any potential conflicts of interest. If declining, they may recommend alternative reviewers.

Step 4: Review Execution

Reviewers critically assess the manuscript, focusing on:

  • Theoretical and practical contribution;
  • Research design and methodology;
  • Clarity, coherence, and relevance of discussion;
  • Originality and appropriateness of citations.

All feedback must be constructive, respectful, and evidence-based.

Step 5: Editorial Decision

Upon receiving reviewer reports, the EiC evaluates the feedback and determines whether the manuscript will be:

  • Accepted without changes;
  • Accepted with minor revisions;
  • Returned for major revisions;
  • Rejected.

In cases of conflicting reviews, additional reviewers may be consulted.

Step 6: Notification to Authors

The editorial decision is communicated to the corresponding author along with anonymous reviewer comments and revision guidelines, where applicable.

Step 7: Revisions and Resubmission

If revisions are required, authors must address all comments and resubmit within the given deadline. Depending on the extent of changes, the revised manuscript may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers.

Step 8: Final Acceptance and Production

Once accepted, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting, proofreading, and formatting. Page proofs will be sent to the authors for final approval before publication.

Reviewer Feedback and Recognition

Reviewers are informed of the final editorial decision and may receive the revised version if participating in a second review round. Their contribution is acknowledged, and constructive feedback is provided to support future collaborations.

Commitment to Ethical and Transparent Review

ABRIJ adheres to the principles of fair, timely, and rigorous peer review in line with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. The journal values the expertise and contributions of its reviewers and is committed to maintaining a professional, ethical, and transparent review process that upholds academic integrity and enhances the quality of published research.

Peer Review Process Flowchart