PEER REVIEW POLICY

 

Journal of Administration & Economics (JAE)

1. Manuscript Submission

All manuscripts must be submitted through the Journal of Administration & Economics (JAE) online submission system before entering the peer-review process. Authors may register and submit manuscripts through the following link:

https://admics.uomustansiriyah.edu.iq/index.php/admeco/user/register

2. Peer Review Model

JAE follows a double-review model in which manuscripts are evaluated by external reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Authors are neither required nor invited to nominate reviewers, and they are not asked to identify reviewers whom they wish to exclude from consideration.

3. Review Workflow

  1. Initial editorial screening. Each submitted manuscript undergoes a preliminary assessment by the Editorial Board to determine whether it is suitable to proceed to peer review.
  2. Similarity screening. Following initial editorial approval, the manuscript is subjected to comprehensive electronic similarity screening. Similarity checks may also be conducted again at any subsequent stage of the publication process.
  3. External peer review. The Section Editor assigns the manuscript to appropriately qualified external reviewers. Reviewers are expected to assess both the major and minor aspects of the manuscript rigorously, accurately, and constructively.

4. Reviewer Responsibilities and Review Standards

To support a rigorous, confidential, and constructive peer-review process, JAE requires reviewers to observe the following standards:

  1. Subject expertise. Reviewers should accept an invitation only when the manuscript falls within their area of expertise. If a reviewer does not have the appropriate specialist knowledge required to evaluate the manuscript, the invitation should be declined.
  2. Confidentiality and use of artificial intelligence. Reviewers must not upload, submit, reproduce, or enter the manuscript, or any part of it, into artificial intelligence tools or services in any form. This requirement is intended to protect the confidentiality of unpublished scholarly material.
  3. Structured review form. A reviewer who accepts the invitation should complete the journal’s electronic review form, including the structured multiple-choice items and the overall recommendation, in order to facilitate a clear and systematic assessment.
  4. Detailed and constructive comments. Reviewers should provide precise, relevant, and constructive comments designed to help authors improve the manuscript. Where appropriate, comments may be inserted directly into the PDF version of the manuscript. Reviewers should also provide a separate review report identifying the essential points that require revision.
  5. Confidential comments to the editors. Comments intended only for the Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor, and not for the authors, should be entered in the confidential comments section of the review form.
  6. Recommendation for rejection. If a reviewer recommends rejection, the reasons should be stated clearly and appropriately. Whenever possible, the reviewer should also provide constructive suggestions that may assist the authors in improving the work before submitting it to another journal or publication venue.
  7. Language quality review. Manuscripts are reviewed by specialists in Arabic and English, as appropriate, to ensure adequate linguistic quality and to minimize language-related weaknesses that may otherwise affect the manuscript’s acceptability.
  8. Review of revised manuscripts. After authors complete the required revisions, the manuscript undergoes a further check and may be returned to the reviewer to verify that the substantive points raised during the review have been addressed appropriately.

5. Purpose of the Policy

This policy is intended to promote a fair, rigorous, confidential, and constructive review process and to support the publication of manuscripts that meet the academic, methodological, and linguistic standards of the Journal of Administration & Economics (JAE).