Review Policy

Peer review involves the examination of an author’s scholarly research by experts in the same field to verify its validity and assess its suitability for publication. The Journal of Educational and Management Studies (JEMS) employs a double-blind peer review process, involving at least two reviewers (one external and one internal). This method ensures a fair, impartial, and critical evaluation of submissions, providing expert assessments to authors, readers, and other stakeholders (subject to the corresponding author’s agreement).

Objectives and Procedures:

  • Purpose: The primary goal of peer review is to enhance the accuracy, clarity, and comprehensiveness of published manuscripts and assist editors in determining their suitability for publication. Reviewers do not guarantee manuscript quality or detect scientific misconduct; instead, they offer advice to editors on potential improvements and the manuscript’s priority for publication.
  • Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers assess the soundness and coherence of the research, the significance of the topic, and the quality of writing. Decisions are ideally based on reviewer consensus or where there is no strong dissenting opinion. In cases of disagreement, input may be sought from an editorial board member or a researcher with similar expertise.
  • Decisions: Editors are not obligated to subject all manuscripts to external review; some may be returned or declined without external review to expedite submission to another journal. Editors regularly publish statistics on the journal’s review process, including the number of submissions, acceptance rate, average time to initial and final decisions, and time from acceptance to publication.

Submission and Review:

  • Submission: IJEF accepts submissions through the journal’s Online Submission Form. Authors must include a cover letter explaining why the manuscript should be considered and confirming compliance with IJEF editorial policies. A declaration of competing interests must also be submitted with the manuscript.
  • Review Process: Initially, all manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software. For manuscripts free from plagiarism, IJEF adopts a double-blind reviewing model. Each manuscript is edited and reviewed by an English language editor and at least two reviewers (one external and one internal), selected by the section editor of IJEF. Reviewers complete a result form to guide authors.
  • Decisions: Possible decisions include acceptance as is, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Authors are required to submit their revisions within 14 days for minor revisions or 30 days for major revisions.

Key Characteristics of IJEF's Peer Review Process:

  • Active Editors: All decisions are made by editors actively engaged in research.
  • No Artificial Limitations: There are no artificial limitations on the number of articles published or a predetermined acceptance rate.
  • Discussion with Reviewers: Editors engage in discussions with reviewers regarding manuscripts that receive "major revision" recommendations before making a decision. Additional experiments are requested only if deemed essential and can be completed within approximately two months.
  • Efficiency and Fairness: Following peer review, decision letters are sent to authors, and accepted manuscripts are published upon the authors’ response. The objective is to enhance the efficiency and fairness of the peer review process by minimizing revision rounds and requesting additional experiments only when necessary.