Journal of Management & Public Policy (JMPP) has an objective peer review policy. All the reviewers are expected to adhere to the peer review policy of JMPP while evaluating the research articles. Generally, the review process takes 6-8 weeks.
Initial Screening
All the articles received for publication undergo initial screening by the editorial and publication team of JMPP. During the initial screening, the editors look at the suitability and completeness of the article, appropriateness of in-text citations, and referencing. Articles clearing the initial screening are sent for peer-review.
Invited articles, viewpoint/opinion articles, case studies, book reviews, interviews, and reports are evaluated for quality of the content and relevance by editorial and publication team.
Selection of the Peer Reviewers
Expertise in a particular domain is the only criterion in the selection of the peer reviewers. Occasionally, the authors are also requested to suggest two-three reviewers who have expertise/publications in the domain in which their article falls. However, the credentials of such reviewers as suggested by the authors, are checked by the editorial and publication team before assigning them any article for review.
While sincere efforts are made to get an article reviewed by two reviewers, at times, decisions are also based on the assessment of one reviewer in case the second reviewer fails to submit his/her report within stipulated time or does not respond to the reminders.
Double Blind Review
JMPP follows double blind review wherein both reviewers and authors have no clue about their respective identities. The reviewers received anonymized files of the article for assessment. Each article sent for the review are coded.
Peer Review Parameters
Peer Reviewers examine the articles on following parameters:
- Does the paper contain new and significant information adequate to justify publication by adding value to the existing knowledge?
- Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources?
- Is the paper’s argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas?
- Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately?
- Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?
- Does the paper clearly identify any implications for practice and/or further research?
- Is the quality of communication in the paper appropriate for an academic journal?
Communication of Peer Review Report
The editorial and publication team takes a decision regarding acceptance/revision/rejection of an article as per the recommendations of the reviewers and communicates the same to the corresponding author.