The peer review process is vital for maintaining high standards of scholarly communication and improving the quality of journals. It also provides an important support for the researchers who write the articles. Reviewers are people who carefully review each article before it is published and contribute to its improvement. Therefore, carefully selected reviewers' feedback and comments are a basic guideline for informing the editor's decision on a research paper. The peer-review process may warn the authors of any errors or omissions in the studies. In this direction, the aim of the referee evaluation process is to contribute to the emergence of original and qualified scientific publications.

Preliminary assessment

All studies submitted to the Journal of Economics, Business and Fiscal Studies are first evaluated by the editorial board. Studies that are not in the scope of the journal, do not comply with the scientific format and do not comply with the format conditions and publication policy of the journal are rejected without being evaluated by the referee. In addition, the plagiarism report of the study and ethics committee approval (when necessary) are reviewed by the editorial board. Studies with a plagiarism rate of 30% (excluding bibliography) or 3% from a source will be returned. The referee evaluation process of the pre-checked studies begins.



Peer Review

Journal of Economics, Business and Finance Studies uses the double-blind peer-review system to keep the names of the referees and authors confidential. Studies that pass the preliminary evaluation stage are sent to at least two referees determined by the editor or the field editor (if it is a work outside the editor's field, it is appointed). Referees are selected based on their area of expertise, and Dr. Academicians with a title or higher are preferred.

After two referees have been appointed, if one of the referees accepts and the other gives a correction (minor or major), the appointment of a third referee can be made optionally by the editor or the field editor. If both referees agree in the first evaluation, the appointment of a third referee can be made optionally by the editor or the field editor. In peer review processes, if two reviewers give a major correction in the first review, the article may be rejected preferably by the editor or the field editor. In the referee evaluation processes, correction suggestions can be given by the editor in addition to the referees. If the author or authors do not make editorial corrections, the editor has the authority to accept or reject the work. As a result of the referee evaluation, if the referees want to see the article again, a referee evaluation form is sent again.

Final Evaluation

The reports received by the referees are forwarded to the editorial board with the decision of the field editor. The work that reaches the editorial board is made ready for publication by making the compliance with the format requirements of the journal and plagiarism control again.