|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Peer Review
Manuscripts submitted to JIBE are evaluated by our experienced in-house editorial team, who make decisions based on a thorough peer review process conducted by academic experts specializing in the manuscript's topic. Peer reviewers are chosen by the journal editors for their expertise in a specific field (e.g., corporate entrepreneurship), their nominations by existing editorial board members, and other relevant factors. The Chief Editor also plays a role in selecting peer reviewers for the journal. These experts provide written assessments of the article's strengths and weaknesses to ensure the highest quality content for the journal.
All manuscripts undergo a thorough double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential, provided the authors have removed all identifying information from the manuscript. The review focuses on objectively assessing the scientific rigor of the research, as well as its significance and contribution to advancing knowledge in the fields of business, economics, and entrepreneurship. Reviewers are provided with an Article Reviewer Form to guide their evaluation. The entire review process may take up to three 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 chief editor reviews the paper’s composition and structure according to the journal’s Guide for Authors to ensure it includes the required sections, follows the correct style, and is suitable, original, and interesting for the journal. If the paper does not meet these criteria, it may be rejected without further review.
2. Invitation to Reviewers
The chief editor invites two reviewers, selecting them based on their expertise related to the manuscript's topic.
3. Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.
4. A review is Conducted
Two reviewers of the same expertise conducted their review of the manuscript.
5. Journal Evaluates the Reviews
After the reviewers submit their feedback to the chief editor, the chief editor will evaluate the review results.
6. The Decision is Communicated
The chief editor sends a decision email to the author notifying them 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 a 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 will also receive an email informing them of the outcome of their manuscript review. If the paper is returned for revision, they can expect to receive the revised version, unless they have chosen to opt out of further participation.
