Peer Review Process

Axinova International Journal of Commerce and Management follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts. The journal is committed to maintaining fairness, transparency, objectivity, and high scholarly standards throughout the review and publication process.

1. Initial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts are initially evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editorial member to determine whether they align with the journal's aims and scope, comply with submission guidelines, and meet basic standards of originality, quality, and academic merit. Manuscripts that fail to satisfy these requirements may be rejected without external review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the preliminary editorial screening are forwarded to two or more independent reviewers who possess expertise in the relevant subject area. The journal employs a double-blind review system, ensuring that the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. This approach promotes impartial, objective, and unbiased evaluation.

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Originality and contribution to existing knowledge
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope and objectives
  • Clarity of research objectives and research questions
  • Appropriateness of methodology and analytical techniques
  • Validity, reliability, and significance of findings
  • Logical organization and coherence of arguments
  • Quality of conclusions and recommendations
  • Quality of writing, language, and overall presentation
  • Compliance with ethical and scholarly standards

4. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ recommendations and editorial evaluation, the Editorial Board may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept as Submitted
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions Required (Revise and Resubmit)
  • Reject

5. Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests are required to address all reviewer comments carefully and submit a revised manuscript within the specified timeframe. Depending on the nature of the revisions, the revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation before a final publication decision is reached.

6. Final Decision

The final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript rests with the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the Editorial Board. Decisions are based on reviewer recommendations, editorial assessment, ethical considerations, and the overall quality of the revised manuscript.

7. Ethical Standards

AIJCM strictly follows the ethical principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All participants involved in the peer-review and publication process are expected to adhere to the highest standards of integrity, confidentiality, fairness, and professional conduct.

8. Peer Review Workflow

The peer review process generally follows the workflow outlined below:

Manuscript Submission → Initial Editorial Screening → Plagiarism Check → Double-Blind Peer Review → Reviewer Recommendations → Editorial Decision → Author Revision (if required) → Final Acceptance → Copyediting & Proofreading → Publication

Policy Updates

The journal reserves the right to revise, modify, or update this Peer Review Policy in accordance with international publishing standards, ethical guidelines, and best practices to ensure the continuous improvement of the review and publication process.