Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica

ISSN: 1454-9409 (print) / 2344–4975 (online) / ISSN–L 1454–9409

The review process

The evaluation process is of the double-blind peer review type (evaluators do not know the name of the author of the article, nor does the author know the names of the evaluators); the evaluators will make an initial evaluation, establishing the references with the capacity of expertise in the field of the work, which will carry out a careful analysis.

Two evaluators will evaluate the paper simultaneously. The basic criteria are:

  • novelty and innovation of ideas and / or analysis;
  • knowledge of the researched field through the study of the specialized literature, and / or the study of some empirical / applied researches in the field;
  • the quality of the methodological approach, the organization of the material, the formulation and presentation of the ideation.

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is via email to the following address: The Editor in Chief/ Executive Editor in Chief sends invitations to individuals believed would be appropriate evaluators/reviewers. Those evaluators/reviewers must comply the following criteria: they have no institutional connection to the author(s) of the paper; and have not been related to those author(s) for the last 4 years in research projects. Afterwards, responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained -2. Potential evaluators/reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline.

The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional evaluators/reviewers so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. The comments are anonymous – double blinde peer review.

Following the evaluation process that will last 60 days, the authors will be informed about the status of the paper: accepted for publication without changes, accepted for publication with minor changes, accepted for publication with major changes, work rejected. Following the evaluation process, the authors are invited to enter the waiting list for publication, or to continue the evaluation process by making any changes requested. Only articles accepted by the Editorial Board will be published.

Papers proposed for publication must be written in English.
The authors of the published articles will receive a free copy of the journal issue in which they appeared.