Evaluation by peers

The reviewer/evaluator understands his/her responsibilities related to confidentiality in the editorial process, and the property of the product of the review, based on the peer review model.

Time of delivery of review: The reviewer/evaluator will accept to evaluate the manuscript only when he/she is deemed qualified to make the review and is capable to deliver it in a timely manner (four weeks maximum). An extension of time will be exceptionally awarded as requested by the reviewer. When the reviewer is unable to read and give an opinion on the text that he/she was invited to review, he/she can suggest names of other reviewers/evaluators, considering his/her own experience and under no personal acquaintance or bias towards a positive or negative appraisal.

Confidentiality: Revision of the manuscript is confidential. The reviewer agrees not to involve anyone else in the review of the manuscript, and not to contact the authors directly. The reviewer shall always respect confidentiality of the revision process.

Objectivity: If a conflict of interest arises and prevents the reviewer from issuing an impartial opinion, he/she shall inform the Editor of EconoQuantum. If the reviewer identifies the author(s) of the article, he/she shall inform the Editor of the journal, who will propose another reviewer. He/she also shall let the Editor know when he/she feels not capable enough to review the document and issue an opinion.

Suspect of ethical violation: The reviewer shall report to the Editor of any irregularity in the research reported in the paper under evaluation. For instance, too many coincidences in the manuscript under review and another text as published in another book or journal, lack of acknowledgement to original sources, plagiarism, or self-plagiarism. The reviewer shall be cautious and avoid further research on his/her own, unless the journal requests for further information or advice.

Revision of the text: The text must be revised in full, and changes may be suggested in order to enrich the manuscript. To do this, an evaluation form is to be completed and solid arguments must be given for each of its sections. This form was provided upon the revision agreement.