Reviewer Guidelines
The journal adopts a double-blinded peer review process. The articles received are assigned by the editors in chief to the associate editors on the basis of their skills and research interests; each associate editor contacts two external reviewers, who receive an e-mail that also recalls the guidelines (in English) to follow during the reviewing process. The reviewers are required to provide an objective and professional review.
Review reports should contain:
- A brief summary outlining the aim of the paper and its main contributions as understood by the reviewer.
- Broad comments highlighting areas of strength and weakness. These comments should be specific enough for authors to be able to respond.
- Specific comments referring to line numbers, tables or figures. Reviewers need not comment on formatting issues that do not obscure the meaning of the paper, as these will be addressed by editors.
A review report should take into account:
- Originality/Novelty: Is the question original and well defined? Do the results provide an advance in current knowledge?
- Significance: Are the results interpreted appropriately? Are they significant? Are all conclusions justified and supported by the results?
- Quality of Presentation: Is the article written in an appropriate way? Are the data and analyses presented appropriately?
- Scientific Soundness: is the study correctly designed and technically sound? Are the data robust enough to draw the conclusions? Are the methods, tools, and software described with sufficient details to allow another researcher to reproduce the results?
- Interest to the Readers: Are the conclusions interesting for the readership of the Journal? Will the paper attract a wide readership, or be of interest only to a limited number of people?
- Overall Merit: Is there an overall benefit to publishing this work? Does the work provide an advance towards the current knowledge? English Level (when appropriate): Is the English language appropriate and understandable?
Manuscripts submitted to Economia Marche Journal of Applied Economics should meet the highest standards of publication ethics:
- Manuscripts should only report results that have not been submitted or published before, even in part.
- Manuscripts must be original and should not reuse text from another source without appropriate citation.
If reviewers become aware of such scientific misconduct or fraud, plagiarism or any other unethical behavior related to the Manuscript, they should raise these concerns to the editor immediately.
Economia Marche Journal of Applied Economics editors never edit reviewer comments intended for the authors. Reviewers are thus asked to make fair comments and to use appropriate language. Confidential comments to the editors can be made in a dedicated box on the review form.