Reviewers Guidelines

Economy and Sociology follows a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous. The review process is conducted via the journal’s online editorial system, which facilitates manuscript submission, evaluation, and decision-making.
Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the journal's high academic standards by providing constructive and objective evaluations of submitted manuscripts.

1. Accessing a Manuscript
Registration and Login

  • Reviewers must register on the journal’s website.
  • New users will receive an automated email for account confirmation and password setup.
  • A single email address should be used for all journal-related activities.

Retrieving Assigned Manuscripts
There are two ways to access a manuscript for review:

  • Through the Journal Website: After logging in, click on the "My Tasks" section, where all assigned manuscripts are listed.
  • Direct Link from Email Notification: Click on the link provided in the review request email.

If you experience login issues, use the "Forgot your password?" option or contact the editorial team.

2. General Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
  • Provide an objective, fair, and constructive evaluation.
  • Do not disclose your identity to the authors.
  • Focus on scientific quality, not linguistic editing (though minor corrections are welcome).
  • Declare any conflicts of interest before reviewing.

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by two to three experts, and efforts are made to reach a decision as soon as possible.

3. Review Criteria
Reviewers should assess the manuscript based on the following:

  • Originality & Novelty: Contribution to the field.
  • Methodological Rigor: Validity of research design and analysis.
  • Clarity & Structure: Logical flow and coherence.
  • Literature & References: Appropriate citation of relevant works.
  • Language & Readability: Adherence to academic writing standards.

Reviewers should start their report with a brief summary of the manuscript, ensuring that their evaluation is based on a correct understanding of the content.
Review Scores
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts using specific scoring criteria:

  • Novelty Score: Is the idea innovative?
  • Methodology Score: Is the research design valid?
  • Applicability Score: Are the findings useful for the academic or professional community?
  • Scholarship Score: Does the paper demonstrate good knowledge of the literature?
  • Language & Clarity Score: Is the manuscript well-written and logically structured?

4. Submitting a Review
The review process consists of:

  • An online questionnaire with structured evaluation questions.
  • A written review with comments for the authors and editors.
  • Annotated files (if needed), using tracked changes in Word or PDF comments.

Reviewer’s Recommendation
At the end of the review, select one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject with resubmission encouraged
  • Reject

Once submitted, the review cannot be changed.

5. Confidentiality & Conflicts of Interest

  • Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or use any unpublished information from the manuscript.
  • If a conflict of interest arises (e.g., previous collaboration with the author), reviewers must decline the review and notify the editorial office.

6. Second Round of Review If a revised manuscript is submitted, reviewers may be asked to assess whether the authors have adequately addressed their comments.

7. Final Decision & Editorial Process

  • The Subject Editor considers reviewers' feedback and makes a decision.
  • If reviewers strongly disagree, the Editor-in-Chief may consult the Editorial Board.
  • Authors receive feedback and may be asked to revise their manuscript.

8. Reviewer Recognition

  • Reviewers receive an acknowledgment email upon submitting their review, along with a Certificate of Confirmation.