The journal's peer-review process

The journal's peer-review process: All articles and research submitted for publication in the Economic Horizons journal are subject to peer review.

The following is an explanation of the peer-review process followed in the journal:

First: Research papers are submitted via email to the journal or through registration on the journal's website. Upon receiving the paper, the editor-in-chief conducts an initial review to ensure compliance with the "Researcher Publication Guidelines" and assesses the accuracy of the language, taking into account the journal's ethics and publication policy. If the guidelines are not followed, the paper is returned to the author.

Second: If the publication rules are followed initially, the editor-in-chief sends the scientific paper to an editor who specializes in the same field of research topic, for initial review and to determine its suitability for external peer review.

Third: The editor of the specialized journal nominates two reviewers, in coordination with the editor-in-chief, for the purpose of reviewing the paper. The research is then sent to the reviewers via email after anonymizing the author (confidential review), along with the journal's approved evaluation form.

Fourth: During the review stage, a comprehensive evaluation of the research paper is conducted, including a thorough examination of its abstract, conclusion, and all its sections, to determine its suitability for publication.

Fifth: The reviewers' decision is delivered via the evaluation form to the editor-in-chief of the journal via email. If both reviewers disagree with the publication of the research, the paper will be returned to the author along with the review result, which indicates rejection. In case of conflicting reviewer decisions (i.e., one reviewer accepts the research and the other rejects it),The editor-in-chief of the journal has the right to favor one reviewer's opinion over another, and in some cases, may refer the research to a second reviewer for a final decision. Fourth: Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the decision will be one of the following: {Suitable for publication without any modifications, suitable for publication after minor revisions, suitable for publication after major revisions, or unpublishable}.

Sixth: After the researcher makes the required and specified revisions, the research paper is returned to the reviewers to ensure their comments and revisions have been implemented.

Seventh: After confirming that all revisions have been made, the researcher is given a letter of acceptance for the research.