Instruction for Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to serve as a reviewer for Journal of Applied Economics and Social Dynamics (JAESD). Your expertise is essential for upholding the quality and integrity of the research we publish. These guidelines are designed to assist you throughout the review process, which is typically expected to take 7–10 days from the date you accept the invitation.

1. Review Process Overview

Our peer review follows a double‑blind system to ensure impartiality. As a reviewer, you will evaluate the manuscript based on its academic merit, without knowledge of the author’s identity.

  • Timeline: We kindly request you complete your review within 7 days of accepting the invitation. If you require an extension, please notify the Handling Editor promptly via the submission system or email.

  • Confidentiality: The manuscript and all related materials are confidential. You must not share, discuss, or use the unpublished content for any purpose.

  • Decision Framework: Your final recommendation should be based on the criteria below. Please select one of the following options:
    Accept | Minor Revision | Major Revision | Reject but Encourage Resubmission | Reject

2. Review Criteria & Report

Please evaluate the manuscript based on the following key areas. Your comments should be detailed, constructive, and evidence-based to help the authors improve their work.

  • Originality & Significance: Does the work present novel findings or a significant advance in the field? Is the research question important?

  • Methodological Soundness: Is the study design appropriate? Are the methods described in sufficient detail to allow replication? Is the data analysis robust and correctly performed?

  • Results & Interpretation: Are the results clearly and objectively presented? Do the discussions and conclusions logically follow from the data, without overstatement?

  • Clarity & Presentation: Is the manuscript well organized and clearly written? Are the figures and tables of high quality and necessary?

3. Review Form (Key Components)

Please structure your report using the following sections, which will be provided in the online review system:

  • Confidential Comments to the Editor:
    Your overall assessment of the manuscript’s suitability for publication, a summary of its strengths and weaknesses, and your recommended decision.

  • Comments to the Author (Point-by-Point):
    Provide numbered comments for the authors to address. Please categorize them as:

    • Major: Fundamental issues that must be corrected.

    • Minor: Suggestions for improvement or clarification.
      Be specific and, where possible, suggest solutions.

  • Rating/Scoring Section:
    You may be asked to rate the manuscript on specific criteria (e.g., originality, technical quality) using a numerical scale.

4. Academic Integrity & Ethics Guidance

  • Objectivity: Provide a balanced, fair, and unbiased critique. Focus on the scientific content, not the authors.

  • Conflict of Interest: If you have any personal, financial, or professional relationship with the authors or their institutions that could bias your judgment, you must immediately decline the review invitation or declare it to the Handling Editor.

  • Citation Policy: Do not request authors to cite your own or your colleagues’ work unless it is scientifically essential, and you disclose this suggestion to the editor.

  • Ethical Concerns: If you suspect plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or other ethical misconduct, please note this in your confidential comments to the editor. Do not conduct your own investigation.

  • Acknowledgement: To recognize your valuable contribution, we will list the names of all reviewers (who grant permission) in an annual acknowledgement published on our website.

Should you have any questions or encounter technical issues, please contact the editorial office at info@leesacademics.com.