Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Advanced Management Studies (JAMS) operates a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, relevance, and integrity of the research published in our journal. Our peer review policy is designed to uphold the highest standards of scholarly excellence and to promote constructive feedback and dialogue among researchers and scholars.

Peer Review Process:

  1. Initial Screening: Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial team to assess their suitability for the journal and adherence to submission guidelines.
  2. Peer Review Assignment: Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to independent experts in the relevant field for peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic credentials, and previous experience.
  3. Double-Blind Review: JAMS operates a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential. This ensures impartiality and eliminates potential biases.
  4. Peer Review Evaluation: Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript based on criteria such as originality, methodological rigor, theoretical framework, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field. They provide detailed feedback and recommendations for improvement.
  5. Editorial Decision: Based on the feedback received from reviewers, the editorial team makes a decision regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision along with reviewers' comments.
  6. Revision and Resubmission: If revisions are required, authors are given the opportunity to address reviewers' comments and revise their manuscript accordingly. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review as necessary.
  7. Final Decision: Following revisions, the manuscript undergoes a final evaluation to ensure that reviewers' concerns have been adequately addressed. The editorial team makes a final decision on acceptance for publication.

Ethical Considerations:

  • Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations objectively, providing fair and constructive feedback while maintaining confidentiality.
  • Authors are required to acknowledge and cite the work of others appropriately and to disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
  • Editors oversee the peer review process to ensure its integrity and fairness, addressing any concerns or conflicts that may arise.

Transparency and Accountability:

  • JAMS is committed to transparency in the peer review process. Authors have the right to know the identities of their reviewers, and reviewers' comments are shared with authors to facilitate transparency and accountability.
  • Reviewers are encouraged to declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality and to provide transparent and constructive feedback.

Feedback and Continuous Improvement:

  • JAMS welcomes feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers on our peer review process and policies. We are committed to continuously improving our practices to ensure the highest standards of quality and integrity.