Peer Review Policy

"The Management Science letter" is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity and publishing only the most valuable research in the field of management science. To achieve this, all submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous peer review process. This policy outlines the key principles and procedures that guide this process.

2. Scope of Peer Review

All original research articles submitted to "The Management Science letter" are subject to double-blind peer review. This means that the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept anonymous throughout the process. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the relevant area of research and their ability to provide constructive and objective feedback.

3. Review Process

• Initial Screening: Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or designated associate editor conducts an initial screening to assess the manuscript's fit for the journal, originality, and adherence to formatting guidelines. If deemed unsuitable, the manuscript is promptly returned to the author with clear feedback.
• Peer Review: Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to two external reviewers who independently provide written evaluations addressing:
  • Originality and significance: Does the research offer a novel contribution to the field and address an important research question?
  • Methodology: Is the research design sound and appropriate for the chosen question? Are the data collection and analysis methods rigorous and transparent?
  • Results and interpretation: Are the findings presented clearly and accurately? Are the interpretations well-supported by the data?
  • Writing and presentation: Is the manuscript well-written, concise, and free of grammatical errors? Are the figures and tables clear and informative?
• Editorial Decision: Based on the reviewers' reports and their own assessment, the Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision on the manuscript:
  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication with no or minor revisions.
  • Revise and resubmit: The manuscript requires revisions based on the reviewers' feedback before being reconsidered for publication.
  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards and is not suitable for publication.

4. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards, including:

• Confidentiality: Maintaining the anonymity of authors and reviewers.
• Objectivity: Providing unbiased and fair feedback based solely on the merits of the manuscript.
• Disclosure: Declaring any potential conflicts of interest with the research or authors.