1. Purpose of Peer Review
The Economics and Finance Letters (EFL) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process. Peer review serves as a critical mechanism for evaluating the quality, originality, validity, and significance of submitted manuscripts before publication.
The primary objectives of peer review are to ensure the scientific integrity of published research, enhance manuscript quality through constructive feedback, and promote the advancement of knowledge in economics, finance, banking, accounting, business economics, financial markets, and related disciplines.
2. Initial Editorial Assessment
All manuscripts submitted to EFL undergo an initial evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor. During this stage, manuscripts are assessed for:
-
Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
-
Originality and potential scholarly contribution;
-
Compliance with submission and formatting requirements;
-
Scientific rigor and methodological soundness;
-
Adherence to ethical and publication standards;
-
Clarity of language and presentation.
Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope or fail to meet minimum quality or ethical standards may be rejected without external peer review.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review Process
EFL follows a double-blind peer review system, whereby the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.
Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts do not contain information that could reveal their identity. Likewise, reviewers remain anonymous unless they voluntarily disclose their identity after the completion of the review process.
Following editorial screening, suitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide recommendations to assist editors in making informed publication decisions.
The double-blind review process helps ensure impartiality, fairness, and objectivity while minimizing potential bias.
4. Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to conduct evaluations in a professional, objective, and timely manner. Specifically, reviewers are requested to assess:
-
Originality and novelty of the research;
-
Theoretical and practical significance of the study;
-
Soundness of research design and methodology;
-
Accuracy and appropriateness of data analysis;
-
Validity of findings and conclusions;
-
Adequacy of references and literature review;
-
Clarity, coherence, and organization of the manuscript;
-
Compliance with ethical standards.
Reviewers should provide constructive comments that help authors improve the quality and clarity of their manuscripts and should notify editors of any suspected ethical concerns or research misconduct.
5. Editorial Decision-Making
Based on reviewers’ reports and editorial evaluation, one of the following decisions may be reached:
-
Accept;
-
Accept with Minor Revisions;
-
Major Revisions Required;
-
Reject and Resubmit;
-
Reject.
The final decision regarding publication rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor. Where necessary, additional expert reviews may be sought before a final decision is made.
6. Plagiarism Screening and Originality Verification
EFL is committed to publishing original scholarly work and preventing publication misconduct. All submitted manuscripts are screened for similarity and originality using iThenticate through the Crossref Similarity Check service.
The journal does not accept manuscripts containing:
-
Plagiarism;
-
Self-plagiarism;
-
Duplicate or redundant publication;
-
Data fabrication or falsification;
-
Citation manipulation;
-
Any other form of academic misconduct.
Cases of suspected misconduct are handled according to the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Manuscripts found to violate publication ethics may be rejected, corrected, retracted, or otherwise sanctioned as appropriate.
7. Conflict of Interest
Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence the research, peer review process, or editorial decisions.
Conflicts of interest may include financial relationships, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, professional collaborations, or any other circumstances that could affect objectivity.
Authors are required to include a conflict of interest statement in their manuscripts. Reviewers and editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.
8. Research Ethics and Human Participants
Research involving human participants must comply with internationally accepted ethical standards and relevant institutional and national regulations.
Where applicable, authors must:
-
Obtain approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethics Committee, or equivalent body prior to conducting the research;
-
Clearly state ethics approval information in the manuscript;
-
Obtain informed consent from all participants;
-
Protect participants' privacy, confidentiality, and rights.
Editors may request supporting documentation regarding ethics approval and informed consent at any stage of the review process.
9. Confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose, distribute, discuss, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal, professional, or financial advantage.
Information obtained through the peer review process must remain confidential and may only be used for the purpose of manuscript evaluation.
10. Appeals and Complaints
Authors who believe an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding or procedural error may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief.
The journal also welcomes complaints concerning publication ethics, editorial conduct, or peer review procedures. All appeals and complaints are handled fairly, transparently, and in accordance with COPE Core Practices and relevant ethical guidelines.
11. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity
EFL adheres to the principles and best practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Crossref, and internationally recognized publishing standards.
Authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher share responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record through honesty, transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct throughout the publication process.
Through its peer review and editorial procedures, The Economics and Finance Letters aims to publish high-quality research that contributes to theoretical development, policy discussions, and practical applications in economics and finance.
References
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2019). COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2021). COPE Core Practices. Available at: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
Crossref. (2024). Similarity Check Powered by iThenticate. Available at: https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). (2024). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Available at: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/
Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2011). Responsible research publication: International standards for editors. In T. Mayer & N. Steneck (Eds.), Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment (pp. 317–328). World Scientific.
Eysenbach, G., & Till, J. E. (2001). Ethical issues in qualitative research on internet communities. BMJ, 323(7321), 1103–1105. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7321.1103