Guidelines for Reviewers
Guidelines for Reviewers
Reviewers have an ethical responsibility to provide well-founded, constructive, and timely academic assessments within the deadlines established by the publisher, in accordance with the international standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
- Scientific and Editorial Evaluation Criteria
During the thorough assessment of a manuscript, reviewers must substantiate their recommendations by considering the following key aspects:
- Originality and Innovation: Assess whether the manuscript offers novel perspectives, emerging theoretical approaches, or significant empirical findings in its field of study, ensuring that it does not contain outdated or redundant content.
- Methodological Rigor and Consistency: Examine the methodological design, the appropriateness of data collection and analysis tools, and the logical consistency between the research objectives, results, and conclusions.
- Scientific Contribution and Relevance: Evaluate the impact of the article and its actual contribution to the theoretical or practical advancement of business sciences, as well as its alignment with the journal's thematic areas.
- Writing Quality and References: Assess structural clarity, the academic rigor of the language, and the comprehensiveness and currency of the bibliographic sources used.
- Ethical Commitments, Confidentiality, and Integrity
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents. Reviewers are prohibited from sharing, disclosing, or using them for personal research purposes without the express authorization of the Editorial Board.
- Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must decline an assignment if they identify any institutional, commercial, financial, or personal conflict of interest involving the authors or the research content.
- Detection of Ethical Misconduct: Reviewers have a duty to notify the Editorial Board of any suspicion or evidence of plagiarism, undisclosed use of generative artificial intelligence tools, data manipulation, or duplicate publication.
- Final Review Recommendation
The evaluation process concludes with the submission of a detailed qualitative review report and the selection of one of the following recommendations:
- Accept the Manuscript: The manuscript is suitable for publication without substantial modifications.
- Accept with Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires specific adjustments suggested by the reviewer.
- Revise and Resubmit (Major Revisions): The manuscript requires substantial restructuring and subsequent reevaluation.
- Reject the Manuscript: The work does not meet the journal's scientific standards or editorial guidelines.
Reviewer Recruitment
If you wish to become part of the international panel of reviewers of Business Innova Sciences in the field of Business Sciences, we invite you to submit an application indicating your research interests and areas of expertise, together with your Curriculum Vitae (including links to your ORCID and Google Scholar profiles), to the journal's official email address:
