Peer Review Process

Peer review is organized strictly according to the established process. The articles are reviewed by at least two active scholars who the editors confidentially appoint. Papers submitted to JEBR undergo peer review to uphold the journal's standards and provide authors with constructive feedback on their submissions. Manuscripts are sent out for review using the OJS platform, and all correspondence occurs through the same platform.

Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business Resilience (JEBR) employs a 'double-blind' review process: the reviewer's identity is not disclosed to the author and vice versa. Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinions on several issues pertinent to a paper's quality and suitability and evaluate papers based on originality and scientific contributions. Reviewers are instructed to provide constructive and formative feedback to authors.

Peer reviewers have four possible options for any paper:

• Accept the manuscript without further amendments;
• Accept manuscript with minor amendments;
• Suggest to make substantial amendments (paper will be sent out for another peer review round);
• Reject manuscript (i.e., if the manuscript is not sufficiently developed for publication).

Authors are expected to revise the accepted manuscript for publication based on the reviews received or provide a substantiated explanation of why they have not been incorporated. Authors should submit the corrected version with highlighted updates. A separate document containing the authors' explanations for each reviewer's comments should also be uploaded, indicating the location in the manuscript where the updates can be found.

In addition, manuscripts may be returned to the authors by the editors before review if they are out of scope, out of the limits of the word length guidance, or not sufficiently prepared for publication.

Authors are expected to revise their manuscript based on the reviews received or provide a substantiated explanation for any comments not incorporated. Authors should submit the corrected version with highlighted updates. A separate document containing the authors' explanations for each reviewer's comments should also be uploaded, indicating the location in the manuscript where the updates can be found.

Furthermore, the editors may reject or return manuscripts to the authors before review if they are out of scope, exceed the word length guidance, or are inadequately prepared for publication.

All reviews are to be done free of charge.

• Duration of the process: approximate time from receipt of the paper to the decision is 7 weeks.

• Evaluation stages: e.g. technical check → review → editor's decision → corrections → final decision.

• Evaluation criteria: scientific relevance, originality, methodology, writing style, etc.