Emirati Journal of Business, Economics, & Social Studies

Browse Journals

Peer Review Policy

The Emirati Journal of Business, Economics & Social Studies (EJBESS) employs a rigorous doubleblind peer review process with defined timelines, reviewer criteria, and transparency standards.

This page summarizes Section 14 of the Publication Ethics & Editorial Policies and aligns with COPE and DOAJ principles (https://ejbess.emiratesscholar.com/policies/publication-ethics)

1. Peer Review Model

Type: Double-blind peer review; Authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

Reviewers: At least two independent experts per manuscript; a third reviewer or associate editor is involved if reports diverge.

Oversight: The Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors ensure compliance with COPE standards.

2. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are chosen for subject-matter expertise, scholarly track record, absence of conflicts of interest, and, where possible, geographical and institutional diversity.

3. Evaluation Standards

Manuscripts are assessed for:

  • Methodological rigor and appropriateness of analyses.
  • Data integrity & transparency; adherence to EQUATOR guidelines (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE).
  • Originality & contribution to business, economics, and social studies.
  • Clarity & coherence and alignment with Aim & Scope.
  • Ethical compliance (e.g., GDPR, consent).
4. Process & Timelines
  • Initial editorial screening for scope, formatting, ethics.
  • Peer review phase: reviewers typically return reports within 3–5 weeks.
  • Decisions: Accept / Minor revision / Major revision / Reject.
  • Revisions & possible re-review after major changes.
  • Appeals: as per Complaints & Appeals Policy.
5. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must keep confidentiality, declare conflicts, give objective, constructive feedback, avoid submitting AI-generated reports, and may co-review with juniors only if they declare and acknowledge it.

6. Editorial Responsibilities

The Editorial Board appoints expert reviewers, resolves conflicting recommendations, enforces deadlines and quality standards, maintains anonymity, and manages alleged misconduct in accordance with COPE Peer Review Guidelines.

7. Transparency for Authors

Authors receive complete reviewer reports and editorial decisions; major revisions may undergo re- review to ensure requested changes have been addressed.

8. External References