For Reviewers/Evaluators

Code of ethics for Reviewers

The reviewer/evaluator understands the responsibilities associated with confidentiality in the process and the property of the product of revision based on the peer review model.

Time of delivery of revision: The reviewer accepts to evaluate the manuscript only if he/she considers qualified enough to make the revision and is capable of delivering it in the time requested (four weeks maximum). An extension of time will be awarded only when the reviewer requests for it.

If unable to make the revision as requested, he/she can suggest names of other evaluators, based on their experience and without any personal bias or intention for the manuscript to have a positive or negative evaluation.

Confidentiality: Revision of the manuscript is confidential. The reviewer agrees to involve nobody else in the manuscript revision, and not to contact the author directly. The reviewer shall always respect confidentiality of the revision process.

Objectivity: If a conflict of interests prevents the reviewer from giving an impartial opinion, he/she shall inform the Editor of EconoQuantum. If he/she identifies the author(s) of the article, he/she shall inform the Editor, who will propose a new reviewer. He/she shall also inform if when reviewing the document he/she feels not enough experience to give an opinion.

Suspicion of ethical violation: If the reviewer finds an irregularity in the investigation reported in the manuscript under evaluation, he/she must report it to the Editor. Examples: too many coincidences between the manuscript and another published text in a journal or book, lack of acknowledgement to original sources, plagiarism, or self-plagiarism. The evaluator must be cautious and avoid further investigation on his/her own, unless the journal requests for additional information or advice.

Revision of the text: The evaluator must completely review the text and suggest changes that may enrich the manuscript. To do this, an evaluation form is to be completed with solid arguments for each of the questions or sections. This form was handed to the evaluator upon acceptance of the evaluation task.

Quality of the reviewers/evaluators

The Editor undertakes that the manuscripts will be reviewed by qualified specialist evaluators in each topic. He/she will provide guidance to evaluators on what is expected from their evaluation (report format, code of ethics for evaluators, delivery periods).

Therefore, evaluators always will ensure that the opinion is ethical and of quality. The Editor will continually feed the reviewer database, one that reflects the journal's community and updated topics in the field. He/she will request support from the members of the Editorial Committee for the designation of evaluators.

Code of ethics
EconoQuantum maintains codes of ethics for evaluators/reviewers, authors and Editors
based on the codes of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These can be obtained
from https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/cope-ethical-guidelines-peerreviewers

Confidentiality
The Editor and the work team undertake not to share any information related to manuscripts received for publication with people outside the Technical Committee, Editorial Board, authors or evaluators. Honesty and intellectual integrity will be guaranteed throughout the process and after the article is published.

Respect for the double-blind peer review modality will be ensured, with elimination of all indications of authorship in the documents of both authors and reviewers.

Except for the institutional affiliation, email, Orcid identification number and other information the authors decide to include in the text of articles published, authors’ personal information will be confidential.