Peer Review Process

The Journal of Performance in Management and Accounting (JPMA) applies a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to prevent bias and to promote objective evaluation.

All submitted manuscripts are first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editors to determine their suitability in terms of scope, originality, and basic academic standards. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s focus and scope or fail to comply with submission guidelines may be rejected at this stage without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are then sent to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its theoretical contribution, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and relevance to management and accounting practices. Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations, which may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor makes a final decision regarding the manuscript. Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewers’ and editors’ comments and to resubmit within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

The editorial team ensures that the peer review process is conducted in a fair, confidential, and timely manner. JPMA is committed to maintaining high ethical standards in scholarly publishing and strives to ensure transparency and integrity throughout the review process.