All research articles submitted to Management and Accounting Review are rigorously peer reviewed, based on initial editor screening. If it is judged suitable for further consideration by this journal, it is then sent for anonymized reviewing by at least two independent expert referees for double blind peer review. Peer review process for Management and Accounting Review is a strictly anonymous peer review process in which the reviewer’s name is withheld from the author and, the author’s name from the reviewer. The Editor is responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance and rejection of articles. The Editor’s decision is final.

Peer Review Process

1. The corresponding or submitting author submits the article via ScholarOneat https://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/manar. Author is required to register before submitting the article. Prior submitting the article, author needs to ensure that he or she follows the submission guideline as outlined in the journal website. This includes removing the authors and affiliations list in the article for the blind review process.

2. The Managing Editor will check whether the article submitted is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the article may be rejected without being reviewed any further (desk reject).

3. Via the ScholarOne, the handling editors will then send invitation to two suitable reviewers according to their expertise. As MAR is using “double blind review system”, handling editors need to ensure that the authors name and affiliations list are not in the article. Potential reviewers are given one or two weeks to response to the invitations. Potential reviewers may consider the invitation against their own expertise or availability. If the potential reviewers decline, handling editors will then invite another suitable potential reviewer and the process repeats.

4. Once the reviewers accept the invitation, they will be given two weeks to one month to review the article. During the review process, the reviewers are required to fill up the Reviewer’s Evaluation Form. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject the article – or else with a request for revision (either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

5. The handling editors consider all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer to get an extra opinion before making the decision.

6. The author will be informed about the decision via the ScholarOne.

7. If the article is accepted, it will be sent to the production team. If the article is rejected or sent back to author for either major or minor revision, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve their article. The handling editor needs to ensure that the reviewers of the manuscript remain anonymous.

8. If the article was sent back for revision, the author is expected to revise the paper within the stipulated time before the editors may decide to reconsider the paper for publication. The revised article will then be sent to reviewers for their final consent. The articles will only be accepted once the editor receives final consent from the respected reviewers. This is to ensure that the manuscript is of high quality to be published in MAR.