Peer Review Process

EMA Journal (Economics, Management, Accounting) is committed to maintaining the quality, originality, and academic integrity of published articles through a rigorous peer review process.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to assess their relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, compliance with the author guidelines, and adherence to publication ethics. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are evaluated by qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript. The journal applies a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  1. Relevance to the journal's focus and scope.

  2. Originality and contribution to the development of knowledge.

  3. Clarity of the research objectives and problem formulation.

  4. Appropriateness of the research methods and data analysis.

  5. Validity and consistency of the results and discussion.

  6. Relevance of the references and quality of academic writing.

  7. Compliance with ethical standards in research and publication.

Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editor's assessment, a manuscript may be accepted, accepted subject to minor revisions, returned for major revisions, or rejected.

Authors are required to address reviewers' comments carefully and provide a clear response to each comment when submitting a revised manuscript. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the authorized editor, taking into account the reviewers' recommendations, the manuscript's academic quality, and its suitability for the journal.

The duration of the review process may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the time required for revisions. The journal seeks to conduct the review process fairly, objectively, confidentially, and in a timely manner.

All participants in the review process are expected to maintain confidentiality and disclose any potential conflicts of interest.