Peer Review Process

Section Menu

 

The AJMS Peer Review Process explains how the Asian Journal of Managerial Science evaluates submitted manuscripts through initial editorial screening and, where suitable, double-blind external peer review. Manuscripts sent for external assessment are normally reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

1. Double-Blind Peer Review Policy

AJMS uses double-blind peer review: author identities are withheld from reviewers and reviewer identities are withheld from authors. The model is intended to support impartial evaluation of originality, scholarly significance, methodological soundness, clarity, relevance, and research integrity.

2. Submission and Initial Editorial Screening

Authors should follow the Author Guidelines and submit complete files through the Submit Manuscript process. Before external review, the editorial office checks scope fit, completeness, basic scholarly quality, originality and overlap, ethical declarations, and compliance with journal requirements.

3. Reviewer Selection and External Review

Editors normally invite at least two independent external reviewers selected for relevant expertise and independence. Reviewers assess contribution, methods, results, interpretation, presentation, references, ethical compliance, and whether conclusions are supported by the evidence. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and preserve manuscript confidentiality.

4. Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decisions

Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Recommendations are advisory: the Editor-in-Chief or an authorised editor makes the decision after considering the manuscript, reviewer reports, scholarly merit, ethical compliance, and relevance to the Aims and Scope. Conflicting reports may lead to clarification or additional review.

5. Revision, Re-Review and Final Decision

When revision is requested, authors should provide a revised manuscript and a clear point-by-point response. Revised submissions may return to the original reviewers or additional experts. Acceptance remains subject to editorial, ethical, technical, and production checks.

6. Confidentiality, Conflicts and AI Use

Submitted manuscripts, reviews, and editorial correspondence are confidential. Reviewers and editors must not use unpublished information for personal advantage and must follow the Generative AI Policy; confidential manuscript material should not be uploaded to AI services where confidentiality cannot be assured.

7. Ethics, Editorial Independence and Appeals

Concerns about plagiarism, data integrity, image manipulation, citation manipulation, or peer-review manipulation are handled under the Publication Ethics. Editorial decisions are independent of Article Processing Charges & Waivers, advertising, sponsorship, marketing, or ownership interests. Authors may submit a reasoned appeal where they believe a material error affected the process.

AJMS aims to handle manuscripts efficiently but does not guarantee a fixed review period, acceptance, or publication. Historical timing information, where published, should be interpreted as descriptive rather than a promise for individual submissions.