Peer Review Process
The Economic Analysis Review employs a rigorous peer-review process for all submitted manuscripts.
Submission and Initial Assessment
Authors submit their manuscripts electronically through the journal's online submission system.
The editorial team conducts an initial assessment to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal's scope and formatting guidelines.
Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are assigned an identification number for tracking purposes.
Selection of Reviewers
The handling editor identifies and selects suitable reviewers based on their expertise and knowledge in the specific field of the manuscript.
Reviewers are selected to ensure an impartial and unbiased evaluation of the manuscript.
The journal may consider suggestions from the authors regarding potential reviewers, but the final decision rests with the editorial team.
The selected reviewers are invited to review the manuscript, typically with a specified deadline.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript's originality, significance, methodology, validity of findings, and overall quality.
Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations to improve the manuscript, highlighting any strengths, weaknesses, or areas requiring clarification.
Reviewers assess ethical considerations, adherence to research standards, and compliance with relevant guidelines.
Reviewers also assess the clarity, organization, and coherence of the manuscript, suggesting potential revisions or additional information if necessary.
Decision-making and Communication
The handling editor evaluates the reviewers' comments, recommendations, and overall assessment of the manuscript.
The handling editor makes a decision based on the reviewers' feedback and the manuscript's alignment with the journal's scope and quality standards.
Possible decisions include:
Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication without further revisions.
Minor revisions: The manuscript requires minor changes or clarifications.
Major revisions: Significant revisions are needed to address the reviewers' comments and improve the manuscript.
Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or does not align with its scope.
The decision, along with the reviewers' comments, is communicated to the authors in a clear and constructive manner.
If revisions are requested, authors are provided with a timeline for resubmission, typically accompanied by a detailed summary of the required changes.
Revision and Final Decision
Authors revise the manuscript, addressing the reviewers' comments and making the necessary revisions.
The revised manuscript is submitted back to the journal, usually within the specified timeline.
The handling editor assesses the revised manuscript to ensure that the reviewers' concerns have been adequately addressed.
Based on the revised manuscript and any additional reviewer feedback, the handling editor makes a final decision regarding acceptance, further revisions, or rejection.
The final decision is communicated to the authors, along with any further recommendations or guidance for finalizing the manuscript.
Anonymity and Confidentiality
The peer review process is conducted anonymously, ensuring the confidentiality of both the reviewers and the authors.
Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the content of the manuscripts they review.
The identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors, unless the reviewer explicitly agrees to reveal their identity.
Correction and Retraction Policy
The Economic Analysis Review is committed to maintaining the highest standards of accuracy and integrity in published research. This Correction and Retraction Policy outlines the procedures for addressing and rectifying errors, as well as retracting articles when necessary.
Corrections will be issued in cases where errors, inaccuracies, or omissions are identified in published articles that do not invalidate the main findings or conclusions of the research.
Corrections will be considered for factual errors, typographical mistakes, errors in data presentation, or similar issues that do not significantly impact the interpretation or scientific validity of the article.
Corrections will be reviewed and approved by the editorial team in consultation with the authors. All coauthors must agree on the wording of the correction.
Corrections will be published promptly as an addendum or erratum, indicating the nature of the correction and providing the accurate information.
Corrections will be linked to the original article, allowing readers to easily access and review the corrected version.
The corrected article will retain the original publication date to maintain the scholarly record.
Retractions will be issued when there is clear evidence of serious errors, ethical concerns, research misconduct, or other significant issues that render the article's findings unreliable or invalid.
Retractions will be considered in cases of data fabrication, plagiarism, unethical research practices, duplicate publication, or the discovery of major flaws that undermine the integrity or scientific validity of the research.
Retractions will be reviewed and approved by the editorial team, considering the advice of reviewers, and in consultation with the authors whenever feasible.
Retractions will be clearly identified and prominently published, indicating the reasons for the retraction, the correct information (if available), and providing an explanation to the readers.
Retracted articles will be clearly marked as "Retracted" in the article metadata and full text, including the digital watermarking of the article of record as "RETRACTED."
Retracted articles will remain accessible to readers, but with a clear notice indicating their retracted status, to ensure transparency and prevent their further citation as valid research.
Process and Transparency
Authors, readers, and other stakeholders are encouraged to bring potential errors, concerns, or suspected misconduct to the attention of the journal's editorial team.
All corrections and retractions will be handled with strict confidentiality, professionalism, and impartiality.
The journal will respond promptly to any reports of errors, concerns, or misconduct, conducting a thorough investigation and seeking expert opinions when necessary.
The journal will communicate openly and transparently with authors and readers throughout the correction or retraction process, while maintaining the confidentiality of individuals involved.
Authors have the right to appeal a decision regarding a correction or retraction. Appeals should be submitted in writing, providing detailed justifications and supporting evidence.
Appeals will be reviewed by the editorial team, considering the advice of external experts if required, to ensure a fair and unbiased evaluation.
The decision made upon the appeal will be final and communicated to the authors in a timely manner.