Reviewer Policies
1. Reviewers' Guidelines
The Reviewers' Guidelines outline the expectations and responsibilities of reviewers involved in the peer review process. Reviewers are essential to maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal by providing objective, constructive feedback to authors.
-
Objectivity and Confidentiality: Reviewers must assess manuscripts based on their scientific merit, originality, and contribution to the field of marketing management. All reviews should be conducted impartially, with a focus on the content rather than the identity of the author(s). Reviewers are also required to treat the manuscript as confidential, refraining from discussing its content with others unless necessary for the review process.
-
Timeliness: Reviewers should provide their feedback within the specified time frame to ensure the smooth and timely processing of manuscripts. In case of delay, reviewers are encouraged to notify the editorial team in advance.
-
Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are expected to provide clear, specific, and constructive comments that will help authors improve the quality of their work. This includes suggesting areas for improvement in terms of methodology, clarity, relevance, and contribution to the literature.
-
Plagiarism Detection: Reviewers are responsible for identifying any potential instances of plagiarism or ethical misconduct in the submitted manuscript. They should inform the editor if they suspect any form of academic dishonesty.
-
Recommendation: After reviewing the manuscript, reviewers are asked to recommend one of the following outcomes: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. The reviewers' feedback should justify their decision and help guide the editorial team in making the final decision.
By following these guidelines, reviewers play a vital role in ensuring that the journal publishes only high-quality and ethically sound research.
2. Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (Specific to Reviewers)
The Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (specific to reviewers) policy is crucial to maintaining the integrity and fairness of the peer review process. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a manuscript for review. A conflict of interest can arise if a reviewer has any personal, professional, or financial relationship with the authors or the topic of the manuscript that could bias their evaluation.
-
Disclosure of Conflicts: Reviewers must disclose any competing interests or financial ties that could influence their impartiality. These may include personal relationships with the authors, financial investments in companies or research related to the topic, or recent collaborations with the authors. If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer should decline to review the manuscript and notify the editorial team.
-
Impartiality and Transparency: It is essential that reviewers assess manuscripts objectively, with the sole focus on the quality and academic merit of the work. The presence of a conflict of interest must not influence the reviewer’s decision-making process. The editorial team relies on the disclosure of any such interests to ensure a fair review process.
-
Failure to Disclose Conflicts: If a conflict of interest is discovered after a review is completed and it is found that the reviewer did not disclose it, the manuscript may be subject to a re-evaluation, and the reviewer may be excluded from future review assignments. This is to maintain the transparency and integrity of the review process.
