EDITORIAL PROCESS
Peer Review Process
JGBM uses a clear, fair, and double-anonymized process to assess scholarly work before publication.
Double-anonymized peer review
JGBM uses double-anonymized peer review: author identities are not shown to reviewers, and reviewer identities are not shown to authors. Editorial decisions are based on the relevance, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, and ethical integrity of the work.
- Submission and technical check.The Editorial Office checks files, anonymization, completeness, article type, and essential declarations.
- Editorial assessment.An Academic Editor evaluates scope fit, scholarly quality, and whether the manuscript should proceed to review.
- Independent review.Suitable manuscripts are assessed by independent subject experts with no relevant conflicts of interest.
- Editorial decision.The Academic Editor considers the reports and communicates an accept, minor revision, major revision, or rejection decision.
- Author revision.Authors respond to reviewer comments and submit a revised manuscript where required.
- Production and publication.Accepted work proceeds through copyediting, proof review, DOI assignment, and online publication.
Fair and independent decisions
Reviewers provide recommendations; final editorial decisions are made by the designated Academic Editor. Editorial decisions are based on academic merit and ethical compliance, independent of an author’s institution, nationality, seniority, or funding status.