Peer review represents a vital element of maintaining high standards in scholarly publishing. This process could not be managed without the knowledge and experience of contributing specialists. We are very grateful to all our reviewers for the time and effort they spend evaluating manuscripts for The Canadian Journal of Applied Business Economics.
General Expectations
The journal uses a closed single-blind peer review system (the names of the reviewers are hidden from the authors).
Submitted manuscripts are reviewed by two or more experts. Reviewers are asked to recommend whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised or rejected.
Reviewers are asked to provide detailed, constructive comments that will help both the editors make a decision on the publication and the author(s) to improve their manuscript. They should point out whether the work has serious flaws that preclude its publication, or whether additional experiments should be carried out or additional data should be collected to support the conclusions drawn.
Reviewers are also asked to comment on the language used by the Authors – whether it is appropriate (specific terminology) or correct (grammar, spelling). Reviewers should advise if any verification of the language by a native speaker is required prior to publication.
Reviewers invited by the editors of the journal should reveal any potential conflict of interest they may have with respect to the manuscript or the authors. All likely personal, professional or financial conflicts of interest should be considered.
Technicalities
We ask reviewers to return their reports within the specified deadline or inform the Editor as soon as possible if they are not able to do so. Reviewer reports can be submitted via online submission.
The Canadian Journal of Applied Business Economics uses open-assessment model of reviews. Everyone is welcomed to provide comments on the discussion paper. Please note that not all comments can be regarded as a review. Only contribution that fulfill the expected level of details and expertise and contribute to the assessment of the vital aspects of the article can be counted as reviews.
The reviewers make an objective, impartial evaluation of scientific merits of the manuscript and are asked to comment on the following aspects of submitted manuscripts:
- novelty and originality of the work,
- broad interest to the community of researchers,
- significance to the field, potential impact of the work, conceptual or methodological advances described,
- study design and clarity,
- substantial evidence supporting claims and conclusions,
- rigorous methodology.
If a manuscript is believed to not meet the standards of the journal or is otherwise lacking in scientific rigour or contains major deficiencies, the reviewers will attempt to provide constructive criticism to assist the authors in ultimately improving their work. If a manuscript is believed to be potentially acceptable for publication but needs to be improved, it is invited for reconsideration with the expectation that the authors will fully address the reviewer’s suggestions.
Once all reviews have been received and considered by the Editor, a decision letter to the author is drafted. There are several types of decisions possible:
- accept without revision
- minor revision
- major revision
- reject
Revised manuscript submission
When revision of a manuscript is requested, authors should return the revised version of their manuscript as soon as possible. Prompt action may ensure fast publication if a paper is finally accepted for publication. If it is the first revision of an article, authors need to return their revised manuscript within 28 days. If it is the second revision authors need to return their revised manuscript within 14 days. If these deadlines are not met, and no specific arrangements for completion have been made with the Editor, the manuscript will be treated as a new one and will receive a new identification code along with a new registration date.
The final decision is made by the Associate Editor. Final proofreading Authors will receive a PDF file with the edited version of their manuscript for final proofreading. This is the last opportunity to view an article before its publication on the Journal web site. No changes or modifications can be introduced once it is published. Thus, authors are requested to check their proof pages carefully against the manuscript within 3 working days and prepare a separate document containing all changes that should be introduced. Authors are sometimes asked to provide additional comments and explanations in response to remarks and queries from the language or technical editors.
Immediate publication
Manuscripts ready for publication are promptly posted online. The manuscripts are considered to be ready for publication when the final proofreading has been performed by authors, and all concerns have been resolved. Authors should notice that no changes can be made to the articles after online publication.