Frontline Marketing, Management and Economics Journal (FMMEJ)
ISSN: 2752-700X
The Frontline Marketing, Management and Economics Journal (FMMEJ) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer-review process. All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a Double-Blind Peer Review procedure to ensure academic quality, originality, and research integrity.
Double-Blind Peer Review Policy
FMMEJ follows a Double-Blind Peer Review system in which:
- Authors do not know the identity of reviewers.
- Reviewers do not know the identity of authors.
- Manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit, originality, relevance, and scientific quality.
- Editorial decisions are made independently based on reviewer recommendations and editorial assessment.
This process helps maintain fairness, objectivity, and confidentiality throughout the review procedure.
Peer Review Workflow
Step 1: Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system. The submission must comply with the journal's formatting requirements, ethical standards, and author guidelines.
Step 2: Initial Editorial Screening
The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor conducts an initial evaluation to determine whether the manuscript:
- Falls within the journal's aims and scope.
- Meets basic quality standards.
- Complies with submission guidelines.
- Demonstrates sufficient academic merit.
- Meets publication ethics requirements.
Manuscripts that fail to meet these criteria may be rejected before peer review.
Step 3: Plagiarism and Ethics Check
Submitted manuscripts may undergo screening for:
- Plagiarism
- Duplicate publication
- Redundant submission
- Ethical concerns
- Citation manipulation
Manuscripts with significant ethical issues may be rejected without further review.
Step 4: Reviewer Assignment
Suitable manuscripts are assigned to independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise.
Typically, each manuscript is evaluated by at least two qualified reviewers.
Reviewers are selected based on:
- Subject knowledge
- Research experience
- Publication record
- Absence of conflicts of interest
Step 5: Peer Review Evaluation
Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:
- Originality and innovation
- Relevance to the journal
- Research design and methodology
- Data analysis and interpretation
- Literature review quality
- Clarity of presentation
- Validity of conclusions
- Ethical compliance
- Overall contribution to the field
Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations for improvement.
Step 6: Editorial Decision
Based on reviewer reports, the editor may make one of the following decisions:
- Accept without revisions
- Accept with minor revisions
- Request major revisions
- Resubmit for further review
- Reject
The final publication decision remains the responsibility of the editorial team.
Step 7: Author Revision
Where revisions are requested, authors must address reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript along with a response explaining how the comments were addressed.
The revised manuscript may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.
Step 8: Final Acceptance
Once the manuscript satisfactorily addresses all reviewer and editorial comments, it receives final acceptance for publication.
Step 9: Copyediting and Production
Accepted manuscripts undergo:
- Language and formatting review
- Metadata verification
- DOI assignment
- Layout preparation
- Final quality checks
Authors may be asked to review proofs before publication.
Step 10: Publication
The final article is published online as an open-access publication and becomes immediately available to readers worldwide.
Review Timeframe
The journal strives to complete the peer-review process efficiently. Review times may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and revision requirements.
Authors are regularly informed about the status of their submissions throughout the review process.
Reviewer Confidentiality
All reviewer identities and reports are treated as confidential. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality regarding manuscript content and related communications.
Conflict of Interest
Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their objectivity. Manuscripts involving conflicts of interest will be reassigned to independent reviewers or editors.
Ethical Standards
The peer-review process is conducted in accordance with the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All participants in the review process are expected to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity, professionalism, and ethical conduct.
Commitment to Quality
Through its double-blind peer-review system, FMMEJ seeks to ensure that published articles are original, reliable, academically rigorous, and contribute meaningfully to the fields of marketing, management, economics, business, finance, entrepreneurship, and related disciplines.