The review process
Studia Universitatis "Vasile Goldiș" Arad – Economics Series is opened and available for a wide range of articles, studies, analysis and research developments in the field of economics, business, finance, accounting, management and marketing.
The review process is constructed upon several stepts and developments:
Step 1 – Technical Screening.
The articles received are, at first, are analized by the Editorial Board. This step of analysis includes, at first, a technical screening of the manuscript in order to analyze that the paper correspond to the Journal’s policies, themes, structure and characteristics. Next step envolve that the manuscript is screened by the Ithenticate Plagiarism programme in order to assess the originality and the plagiarism percentage points for evaluation the originality of the paper in order to avoid the publication of a part or of the entire manuscript in other journals.
Step 2 – Editorial Board quality standards assessment.
At this stage, if the manuscript passes the first step it is assign to an Academic Editor, member of the Editorial Board who is specialized upon the topic and theme of the article. The Academic Editor evaluates the quality aspects of the article, the methodology and gives an specialized opinion upon the acceptance of the article for the review process. Once the paper is accepted for ongoing process the article will undergo to review. If the article does not meet the quality academic and research requirements the article is rejected.
Step 3. – Double Blind Peer Review Process.
In cases in which the article passes Step 2 it will undergo a review process. The Journal fololows a Double Blind Peer Review Process. This means that the article will be reviewed by two independent reviewers specialized and experts in the field. This stage is leaded by the Academic Editor. The reviewers ale selected upon their expertize fileds and domains, must be highly academic and research specialists and must have worldwide publications and citations upon the manuscript theme. The Journal encourages experts both on national and international countries, depending on the topic of the theme and the world coverage enriched in the study. The reviewers express their opinion in the Reviewer Manuscript Guide template making a qualitative and quantitative approach regarding the submitted manuscript. The reviewer resolution can be: accepted, major revision, minor revision, rejected. If the opinion of the two reviewers are separately and divergent the Academic Editor will assess a third reviewer in order to fulfill a third expertise in the field. The reviewers can suggest and expect that the manuscript will be adjusted to their suggestions as many times as needed in order to assess a final version of a quality paper.
Step 4. Final decision.
Based of the reviewers reports and on the several improvements of the article made by the authors, the Editor – in – Chief of the Journal, taking into account the Academic Editor final opinion and taking into account the Editorial Board opinions and discussions undertake the final decision upon the publication of the paper in one of the Journal issues.