Information for Reviewers

Information for Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the high scholarly standards of the South-Eastern Europe Journal of Economics. Thank you for volunteering your time and expertise to support our community.

Maintaining Anonymity

To preserve the integrity of the double-blind peer review process, please adhere to the following guidelines:

  • Identification: Do not attempt to identify the authors. If you realize you know who the author is (e.g., through previous presentations or specific data), please notify the Editor immediately to discuss if a conflict of interest exists.

  • Review Tone: Avoid phrases that might reveal your identity (e.g., "In my own 2022 study, I found...").

  • File Metadata: If you upload a document with "Tracked Changes" or comments, you must remove your name from the file properties. (In Microsoft Word: File > Info > Check for Issues > Inspect Document > Remove Document Properties and Personal Information).

Ethical Requirements

  • Confidentiality: The manuscript is a privileged communication. Do not share, cite, or use any of the data, ideas, or content before publication.

  • Conflict of Interest: Please recuse yourself immediately if you have a close professional or personal relationship with a suspected author or their institution.

Evaluation Criteria

Please provide a critical assessment based on the following key dimensions:

  1. Originality: Does the work offer a significant new contribution to the field of economics?

  2. Methodological Rigor: Are the methods appropriate, ethical, and described in enough detail to be replicated?

  3. Evidence-Based Conclusions: Do the data and results logically support the final claims?

  4. Structure & Language: Is the abstract representative of the paper? Is the writing clear, concise, and professional?

Structure of Feedback

We recommend organizing your typed comments into two separate sections within the OJS system:

  • Confidential Comments to the Editor: Share any sensitive concerns regarding ethics, suspected plagiarism, or data integrity here. These will never be seen by the authors.

  • Comments for the Author:

    • Summary: A brief overview of your interpretation of the paper.

    • Major Revisions: Critical issues that must be addressed for the paper to be scientifically sound.

    • Minor Revisions: Suggestions for clarity, grammar, or updated citations.

Recommendation (OJS Submission)

After completing your written comments, you must select one of the following official recommendations in the OJS portal to finalize your review:

  • Accept Submission: The paper is ready for publication as is.

  • Revisions Required: Minor changes are needed; no further review by you is necessary.

  • Resubmit for Review: Major changes are needed; you wish to see the paper again after the authors revise it.

  • Decline Submission: The paper is not suitable for this journal.

 

Note: Depending on the submission type, you may be presented with a specific evaluation form (Research, Replication, or Policy/Report) when completing your submission in OJS.