Peer Review Policy on Review of Financial Economics
The practice of peer review is to ensure that high quality scientific material is published. It is an objective process at the heart of competitive academic publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the Review of Financial Economics, and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process by request from the editorial office.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. Although rare, it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this early stage. Manuscripts rejected at this initial point can arise from various reasons which include the following: the material is insufficiently original; it has serious scientific flaws, grammatical errors or is written in poor English; it falls outside the aims and scope of the journal; the author did not meet all requirements to fulfill the submission process. Those that meet the minimum criteria are generally forwarded to two or more experts for review.
Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt.
Type of Peer Review
This journal has a policy of employing the double blind reviewing method, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process unless it is deemed by the editor to be in the best interests of all parties to use another method of review. At least 95% of manuscripts are reviewed using the double blind method.
How the referee is selected
Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated and we welcome suggestions for referees from authors though these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referee reports
Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original
- Is methodologically sound
- Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
- Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly references previous relevant work
Referees are not expected to correct or edit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.
Length for the review process
Typically a manuscript will be reviewed within three months. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees within two weeks. Referees may, and often do, request more than one revision of a manuscript.
Final report
A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the corresponding author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and usually will include verbatim comments made by the referees.
Editor's Decision is final
Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Becoming a Referee for Review of Financial Economics
If you are not currently a referee for Review of Financial Economics but would like to be added to the list of referees for this title, please contact the editorial office at tmukherj@uno.edu. The benefits of refereeing for Review of Financial Economics include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work within your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in the Review of Financial Economics if you have reviewed at least one manuscript in the previous calendar year. You may also be able to cite your work for Review of Financial Economics as part of your professional development achievements for various Professional Societies and Organizations.
Home | Elsevier Sites | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Site Map | A Reed Elsevier Company