Peer Review Process
African Journal of Economics and Business Research(AJEBR) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal published by Hawassa University. Every paper submitted to AJEBR undergoes a rigorous peer-review mechanism involving experts with relevant competence. Peer review ensures the academic quality, methodological soundness, and credibility of published works. The peer-review workflow in AJEBR proceeds through eleven stages as outlined below.
The corresponding or submitting author uploads the manuscript through our Journal Systems platform.
The editorial office performs an initial screening to ensure conformity with the journal’s focus and scope. Manuscript structure and formatting are checked against the Author Guidelines. At this stage, minimum scholarly quality is evaluated, including methodological clarity. Manuscripts that pass this stage are screened for similarity using Turnitin before being sent to reviewers.
The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the manuscript’s originality, relevance, contribution, and alignment with AJEBR’s mission. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be declined without proceeding to peer review.
The handling editor invites reviewers whose expertise matches the manuscript's subject area and who have no conflicts of interest. AJEBR employs a strict double-blind system: reviewers do not know the authors’ identities, and authors do not know the reviewers’. Manuscripts are sent to reviewers anonymously.
Potential reviewers assess the invitation based on expertise, workload, and conflict-of-interest considerations. They may accept or decline. When declining, they may recommend alternative qualified reviewers.
Reviewers examine the manuscript thoroughly. The initial reading forms an overall impression, while subsequent readings allow detailed evaluation. If major issues arise early, reviewers may recommend rejection. Otherwise, they provide constructive, point-by-point feedback and recommend acceptance, rejection, or revision (major or minor).
The Editor-in-Chief and the handling editor assess all review reports before reaching a decision. If reviewer opinions diverge significantly, an additional reviewer may be consulted.
The editor sends the decision to the author along with anonymized reviewer comments. Reviewers are notified of the editorial outcome regarding their evaluations.
