|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Peer Review Policy
The Journal of International Business, Economics and Entrepreneurship (JIBE) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts. This means that both the identities of the authors and the reviewers are concealed throughout the review to ensure impartial and objective evaluation.
Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team. The screening ensures that the manuscript:
- Falls within the journal’s scope and areas of interest;
- Adheres to the journal’s formatting and ethical guidelines;
- Demonstrates sufficient originality, relevance, and scholarly quality.
Submissions that do not 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 peer review process may take up to three (3) months to complete and follows these steps:
1. Editorial Appraisal by the Chief Editor
The Chief Editor (CE) evaluates the manuscript for structural compliance with the Guide for Authors, including format, organization, completeness, language quality, and ethical declarations. If the manuscript lacks originality, clarity, or journal relevance, it may be rejected at this stage without external review.
2. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
Qualified reviewers are invited based on their subject expertise, previous experience, and absence of conflicts of interest. At least two reviewers are selected for each manuscript. The CE may also consult the editorial board when assigning reviewers.
3. Reviewer Acceptance
Invited reviewers assess their ability to review the manuscript based on their availability, subject relevance and potential conflicts of interest. If declining, reviewers may suggest suitable alternatives.
4. Review Execution
Each reviewer conducts a thorough evaluation of the manuscript, assessing its:
- Theoretical and empirical contribution;
- Research design and methodology;
- Relevance and clarity of discussion;
- Citations and originality.
Comments are submitted confidentially via the journal’s online system. All feedback must be respectful, constructive, and evidence-based.
5. Editorial Evaluation of Reviews
After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the Chief Editor evaluates the feedback and decides whether the manuscript should be:
- Accepted as is;
- Accepted with minor revisions;
- Sent back for major revisions;
- Rejected.
The CE may consult additional reviewers in cases of conflicting recommendations.
6. Decision Notification to Authors
The Chief Editor communicates the decision to the corresponding author. The outcome is accompanied by anonymous reviewer comments and guidance for revisions if applicable.
7. Author Revisions and Resubmission
If revisions are requested, the author is given a deadline to address all reviewer comments and resubmit the revised manuscript. The revised version may be returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation, depending on the extent of changes.
8. Final Decision and Copyediting
Once the manuscript is accepted, it is forwarded to the production team for copyediting, proofreading, and formatting. The authors will receive page proofs for final approval before publication.
Reviewer Feedback Loop
Reviewers are notified of the final editorial decision and may receive the revised version of the manuscript if they have agreed to participate in the second round of review. Reviewers are acknowledged for their service and may receive performance feedback to support future collaboration.
Commitment to Fair and Transparent Peer Review
JIBE is committed to conducting fair, timely, and rigorous peer reviews in line with COPE guidelines. The journal values reviewer contributions and strives to ensure a professional and ethical review environment that upholds academic integrity and improves manuscript quality.
