Peer-review of the article
Review criteria
According to the regulations imposed by the international databases in which our journal is indexed and to the norms defined/established/set by the editor – the Chamber of Financial Auditors of Romania – all the scientific articles are subject to a previous review (evaluation) by the Editorial board of the journal, who is entitled to accept or to reject an article, in what concerns its publication.
The manuscripts which observe the general rules (verified by the Editorial board) are sent to the reviewers. The review of the articles is made from the point of view of the content and of the presentation form of the manuscript
From the content’s point of view, the following aspects , are assessed:
- originality, timeliness, importance and observance of the research field of the proposed subject;
- quality of the research methodology used;
- the way in which the material is structured, the clarity and consistence of the presentation and of the argumentation;
- the correctness of using and interpreting the different notions used in the article;
- relevance of the references used;
- real contribution brought to research in the chosen field, applicability of the proposed solutions.
From the point of view of the form, assessment takes into account the rules presented under the section Authors guidelines, by analysing the lacks of consistency/inconsistencies, omissions and irregularities.
After the thorough verification by the editorial team on the observance of the technical norms mentioned above, the article is send for peer-review to at least two independent reviewers by means of the double-blind-review method. The reviewers do not know the authors’ names, nor do the authors know the reviewers’ names. As a condition of agreeing to assess the manuscript, all reviewers undertake to keep submitted manuscripts and associated data confidential, and not to redistribute them.
The resolution of the independent reviewers can be as follows:
- Acceptance;
- Acceptance with revisions;
- Rejection.
The author will be informed with regard to the outcome of the reviewing process.
In case B, the observations and recommendations are forwarded to the author, for the article’s revision. The observations and suggestions are written in the bottom of the review form under the Recommendation heading. Also, observations can be made in e-format, marked distinctly with coloured letters on the article’s text. A model of the paper evaluation form is available here.
After the peer-review, authors will be required to review the text and correct the reported errors. The editorial team takes no responsibility for data or text errors printed in the Journal if authors do not correct such errors on their proofs. After the acceptance of the final form, the article is taken over by the editorial office for the proofreading and DTP processes in view of its publication.
Judgments will be objective. Reviewers will be chosen so that they will have no conflict of interest. They will point out relevant published work which is not yet cites. The reviewed articles will be treated confidentially.