Peer Review Policy

1. Aims and Scope:

The Journal of Management Science Research Review (JMSRR) aims to publish high-quality, critical reviews of significant research in all areas of management science. We seek insightful analyses of emerging topics, established fields, and methodological approaches that advance the understanding and application of management science knowledge. Our rigorous peer-review process ensures the publication of insightful, relevant, and impactful reviews.

2. Types of Reviews:

JMSRR publishes the following types of reviews:

  • State-of-the-art reviews: Comprehensive analyses of a specific research area, identifying key themes, contributions, and gaps in knowledge.
  • Methodological reviews: Critical evaluations of specific research methods and their application in management science.
  • Book reviews: In-depth assessments of recent books relevant to management science research.
  • Comparative reviews: Analyses of two or more contrasting research perspectives on a specific topic.

3. Peer Review Process:

All submissions undergo a double-blind peer review process. We strive to select reviewers with expertise in the specific area of the review and who are not in direct conflict of interest with the authors. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive and objective feedback on the following aspects:

  • Originality and significance: Does the review address an important topic in management science? Does it offer new insights or perspectives?
  • Accuracy and completeness: Is the review factually accurate and comprehensive? Does it adequately represent the relevant literature?
  • Writing quality: Is the review well-organized, clearly written, and free of grammatical errors?
  • Contribution to the field: Does the review offer valuable insights for future research or practice?

Reviewers are encouraged to provide detailed comments and suggestions for improvement. Authors will receive anonymized review reports and have the opportunity to address reviewer concerns in revised submissions.

4. Conflict of Interest:

Reviewers are expected to declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. Conflicts could include personal or professional relationships with the authors, or financial interests in the topic of the review. In such cases, the reviewer will be recused from the review process.

5. Confidentiality:

Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and review reports. Information obtained during the review process should not be shared with anyone outside the editorial team.