|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Peer Review
Manuscripts submitted to JIBE are assessed by our experienced in-house editorial team, who take all decisions based on an extensive and rigorous peer review process by academic experts who specialize in the manuscript topic. Peer reviewers are expert chosen by journal editors to provide written assessment of the strengths and weakness of article with the aim of producing the highest quality material of the journal. They are selected based on expertise in a specific field (i.e. corporate entrepreneurship) nomination by existing editorial board members, and other factors. Peer reviewers for the journal are also selected by the Chief Editor.
All manuscripts are subjected to rigorous double-blind peer review. The identity of the peer reviewers is not revealed to the authors and the identity of the authors is not revealed to the reviewers, as long as the authors have adequately removed all identifying information from the manuscript. The review process involves an objective assessment of the scientific rigor of the research as well its significance and contribution to advancing knowledge in the field of business, economics and entrepreneurship. An Article Reviewer Form is provided to the appointed reviewers. The review process may take up to 3 months to complete.
In general, a manuscript submitted to JIBE will go through the double-blind peer review process as follows:
1. Appraisal by the Chief Editor (CE)
The CE checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Guide for Authors to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations and is appropriate for the journal as well as sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.
2. Invitation to Reviewers
The chief editor sends invitations to two reviewers. The reviewers are selected based on their expertise in accordance with the topic of the manuscript.
3. Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.
4. Review is Conducted
Two reviewers of the same expertise conduct their review on the manuscript.
5. Journal Evaluates the Reviews
Once the reviewers complete their review and send the results to the chief editor, the chief editor evaluates the results of the review.
6. The Decision is Communicated
The chief editor sends a decision email to the author notifying about the decision for their manuscript, including any relevant comments from the reviewers for revisions. The comments are anonymous
7. Author's Revision
If accepted, the manuscript is sent to copyeditor. If the manuscript is rejected, it will be archived. If the manuscript is sent back for either major or minor revision, the chief editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve his/her manuscript.
The reviewers also receive an email letting them know the outcome of their review on the manuscript. If the paper is sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation.
