For first-time authors, peer review can feel like a black box: you submit a manuscript and then wait, unsure what’s happening on the other side. Understanding the mechanics of the process — who looks at your paper, in what order, and against what criteria — makes the wait less stressful and helps you prepare a submission that moves through review smoothly.
Stage 1: Editorial Screening
Before your paper ever reaches a reviewer, an editor checks it against the journal’s scope, formatting requirements, and basic quality thresholds. This stage exists to protect reviewers’ time and to fast-track papers that are clearly a poor fit, so they aren’t stuck in review for months.
Stage 2: Reviewer Assignment
If your paper clears screening, the editor identifies two or more reviewers with relevant expertise. This is where subfield precision in your abstract and keywords pays off — the more clearly your paper signals its subfield, the faster and more accurately it gets matched to qualified reviewers.
Stage 3: Double-Blind (or Single-Blind) Review
Most economics and management journals use double-blind review, where neither author nor reviewer identities are disclosed. Reviewers assess the paper’s contribution, methodology, clarity, and fit with the literature, typically producing a written report with a recommendation: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject.
Stage 4: Editorial Decision
The handling editor weighs the reviewer reports — which don’t always agree — and makes the final call. A split decision (one reviewer positive, one critical) often results in a request for major revisions rather than an outright rejection, giving you a chance to address the concerns directly.
Stage 5: Revision and Resubmission
If invited to revise, you’ll typically submit a revised manuscript alongside a response letter addressing each reviewer comment point by point. This is one of the most important documents in the entire process — a well-organized response letter can turn a skeptical reviewer into an advocate for your paper.
Stage 6: Final Decision and Production
Once reviewers and the editor are satisfied, your paper moves to acceptance, copyediting, and production ahead of publication.
What Authors Can Do to Help the Process Along
- Follow formatting and length guidelines exactly — nothing slows review down like a manuscript that needs to be sent back for basic fixes.
- Write a clear, specific abstract so reviewers are matched accurately.
- Anticipate likely methodological questions and address them preemptively in your paper.
- Respond to revision requests promptly and thoroughly.
Peer review exists to strengthen your paper, not just gatekeep it. Reviewers who take the time to write detailed reports are, in most cases, genuinely trying to help your argument land more convincingly with readers.
For guidance on what reviewers and editors look for at the international level, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) publishes widely referenced standards for ethical peer review that most academic journals, including this one, align with.
Ready to enter the review pipeline? Check the journal’s scope and begin your submission on the paper submission page.