Peer Review Process

Peer review is a requirement for all papers submitted to the Keynesia for publication. This journal's peer review process involves people with comparable levels of expertise to the author evaluating the work that was submitted. Its goal is to assess whether the scholarly paper is suitable for publication. Peer review is a process used to ensure that papers meet quality requirements and are given legitimacy. All manuscripts submitted to the editor will receive a review using a double-blind review system, meaning that the author does not know the name of the reviewer, and the reviewer does not know the name of the author. Keynesia's peer review process is broken down into the following steps.

1. Paper Submission

The article is submitted to the journal by the corresponding or submitting author. This is done through an online platform that the Open Journal System (OJS) supports. However, Keynesia is temporarily accepting paper submissions by email as well, to help authors.

2. Evaluation of the Editorial Office

The Keynesia editor evaluates the submitted paper first. The editor determines if it fits the purpose and scope of the Journal. The composition and organization of the manuscript are assessed in comparison to the Author Guidelines of the publication to ensure that all necessary sections and stylizations are included. At this stage, the study's basic quality requirements for publishing are also evaluated, and one of the evaluations includes determining whether the manuscript has a significant methodological error. Before being evaluated by reviewers, every work that is submitted and passes this stage will have its plagiarism status checked by Turnitin.

3. Evaluation by the Chief Editor

The Chief Editor determines if the paper is significant, original, and fit for publication in the journal. If not, the manuscript can be dismissed without undergoing additional examination.

4. Request for Reviewers

The handling editor extends invitations to those who, in their judgment, would make excellent reviewers (also known as referees), taking into account their expertise, proximity to the study topic, and lack of conflicts of interest. A community of specialists in the fields of economic development, management science, and accounting science—as described in the focus and scope—who meet the necessary qualifications and are capable of conducting a fairly unbiased assessment participate in the peer-review process at Keynesia.

5. Answering invitations

Reviewers who might accept the offer weigh it against their availability, conflicts of interest, and areas of competence. After that, they choose to accept or reject. If the prospective reviewer declines to review, the editor may request the name of a substitute reviewer in the invitation letter.

6. Evaluation is carried out.

The reviewers dedicate time to thoroughly read the work on multiple occasions. The initial read is employed to establish an initial perception of the piece. If significant issues are identified at this phase, the reviewers may be inclined to reject the manuscript without any additional effort.   Alternatively, they will peruse the article multiple times, making annotations in order to construct a meticulous point-by-point critique. Subsequently, the review is submitted to the journal, accompanied with a recommendation to either accept or reject it, or alternatively, with a request for revision (often categorized as either significant or minor) prior to reconsideration.

7. The journal assesses the reviews.

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor carefully evaluate all the received reviews before to reaching a final decision.   The handling editor has the option to invite an other reviewer in order to acquire an additional perspective prior to reaching a conclusion.

8. The decision is conveyed.

The editor dispatches a decision email to the author, encompassing any pertinent reviewer remarks. Reviewers provide anonymous feedback to the relevant author, who then takes appropriate actions and responds accordingly. At this juncture, reviewers are furthermore dispatched an email or letter to inform them of the outcome of their evaluation.

9. Final Steps

Upon acceptance, the document is forwarded to the copy-editing process. In the event that the article is not accepted or returned to the author for significant or small modifications, the handling editor will provide the author with constructive feedback from the reviewers to assist in enhancing the piece.   The author should implement amendments and undertake a thorough revision of the manuscript in accordance with the comments and suggestions provided by the reviewers.

Once the author has made the necessary changes, they should submit the revised paper again to the editor.

The reviewers should get the updated version if the paper was sent back for changes, unless they chose not to take part in the review process anymore. However, if only small changes were asked for, this follow-up review could be done by the editor who is in charge of the case.

The paper is accepted if the editor is pleased with the changes. The papers that were accepted will be posted online, and all of them can be downloaded for free as PDFs at OJS.