Double-blind peer review

All submitted papers that pass the editorial assessment undergo double-blind peer review, a method of evaluation in which both the author of the article and the reviewers remain anonymous to each other.

Reviewers are asked to complete an evaluation form structured as follows.

Reviewers are initially required to assign a score from 1 to 5 (where 1 is poor and 5 is excellent) to the following aspects:

• Relevance of the topic;
• Originality of the contribution;
• Soundness of the conceptual framework;
• Methodological rigor;
• Significance of the empirical analysis (if applicable);
• Clarity of presentation;
• Interest for the journal’s readers (academics and practitioners).

Reviewers are then asked to provide a detailed evaluation regarding:

• The main strengths of the article;
• The weaknesses of the article;

and also provide additional suggestions and revisions.

Finally, reviewers must give an overall recommendation by selecting one of the following options:

• Accept;
• Accept with minor revisions;
• Major revisions required;
• Reject.