Review Guidelines

The International Journal For Research In Business, Management And Accounting (IJRBMA) journal upholds ethical review standards consistent with the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), global research integrity frameworks, and responsible academic publishing norms.

Peer review is the cornerstone of academic credibility. Reviewers serve as independent subject experts responsible for ensuring the rigor, originality, and scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

1. Peer Review Model

IJRBMA follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process:

  • Author identities are concealed from reviewers.
  • Reviewer identities are concealed from authors.
  • Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent expert reviewers.
  • Editorial decisions are based on reviewer recommendations and academic merit.

The review process is conducted transparently, fairly, and without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, or personal beliefs.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

By accepting a review assignment, reviewers agree to:

2.1 Academic Integrity

  • Evaluate manuscripts solely on scholarly merit
  • Assess theoretical contribution, methodological rigor, and practical relevance
  • Avoid personal bias or ideological influence

2.2 Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts are confidential intellectual property. Reviewers must:

  • Not share, distribute, or discuss manuscripts with unauthorized parties
  • Not use unpublished data for personal research or professional gain
  • Securely delete manuscript files after review completion

Confidentiality obligations extend beyond the review period.

3. Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Reviewers must immediately decline review invitations if conflicts of interest exist, including:

  • Direct collaboration with authors within the past three years
  • Institutional affiliation overlap
  • Financial interests or funding relationships
  • Competitive academic or commercial interests
  • Personal relationships that may compromise impartiality

All potential conflicts must be disclosed to the Editor-in-Chief before proceeding.

4. Ethical Vigilance and Research Misconduct

Reviewers are expected to actively safeguard publication ethics by identifying potential misconduct, including:

  • Plagiarism or substantial similarity
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Manipulated images, tables, or statistical outputs
  • Salami slicing or redundant publication
  • Undisclosed AI-generated content affecting research integrity
  • Citation manipulation or coercive citation practices
  • Ethical violations in human subject research

Any concerns must be reported confidentially to the editorial office and not directly to authors.

5. Advanced Evaluation Standards 

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts according to internationally benchmarked criteria:

5.1 Theoretical Contribution

  • Clear research gap identification
  • Advancement of existing theory
  • Contribution to business, management, or accounting scholarship

5.2 Methodological Rigor

  • Appropriate research design
  • Valid data collection methods
  • Robust statistical or qualitative analysis
  • Replicability and transparency

5.3 Practical and Policy Implications

  • Managerial relevance
  • Industry applicability
  • Policy contribution (where applicable)

5.4 Literature and Referencing Standards

  • Use of high-quality, peer-reviewed sources
  • Inclusion of recent Scopus-indexed literature
  • Balanced and ethical citation practices

5.5 Clarity and Scholarly Communication

  • Logical structure
  • Clear argument development
  • Professional academic writing

6. Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

Reviewers must:

  • Not upload manuscripts to AI platforms or third-party tools
  • Not use generative AI tools in a way that compromises confidentiality
  • Ensure any AI-assisted language editing does not alter the intellectual integrity of the review

7. Timeliness and Professional Conduct

  • Reviews must be completed within the timeline (typically 6–7 weeks).
  • Extensions should be requested promptly when necessary.
  • Reviewers must maintain professional and respectful communication.

Failure to meet deadlines without notice may result in removal from the reviewer panel.

8. Decision Recommendations

Reviewers must provide one of the following structured recommendations:

  • Accept without revision
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject

All recommendations must be supported by detailed, evidence-based justification aligned with the journal’s evaluation criteria.

9. Accountability and Transparency

The editorial office maintains records of review activities to ensure accountability and ethical compliance. Repeated unethical behavior may result in:

  • Removal from the reviewer database
  • Reporting to affiliated institutions (in severe cases)
  • Notification to relevant academic bodies

10. Commitment to Excellence

By participating in the peer review process, reviewers contribute to:

  • Maintaining international publication standards
  • Enhancing the credibility of business and management research
  • Supporting responsible and ethical scholarly communication

IJRBMA recognizes reviewers as essential partners in safeguarding academic quality and advancing global research standards.