Peer Review Policy

Overview

ANMJ is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic excellence, transparency, and integrity. All manuscripts submitted to ANMJ undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure originality, methodological quality, theoretical relevance, and ethical compliance within the domain of business, management, and social sciences.

???? Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review

To ensure impartiality and academic objectivity:

  • Author Anonymity: Reviewers do not know the identities of the authors.

  • Reviewer Anonymity: Authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.

This model guarantees that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit, free from institutional or personal bias.

???? Peer Review Workflow

1. Submission & Initial Editorial Screening

All manuscripts must be submitted through the ANMJ online submission platform. The editorial office conducts a preliminary check to ensure:

  • Alignment with the journal’s scope and aims

  • Formatting compliance and adherence to submission guidelines

  • Ethical documentation (e.g., IRB/ethics approval, if applicable)

  • Plagiarism screening using Turnitin or equivalent software

Submissions not meeting basic criteria may be desk-rejected without external review.

2. Reviewer Selection and Assignment

Each eligible manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers with domain expertise.

Selection Criteria:

  • Subject-matter expertise

  • Track record of publications

  • No conflicts of interest with the authors or content

3. Review Process

Reviewers assess submissions on the basis of:

  • Originality and contribution to management knowledge

  • Methodological robustness

  • Relevance to theory or practice

  • Quality of analysis and interpretation

  • Organization, clarity, and scholarly presentation

Reviewer Recommendations:

  • Accept as is

  • Accept with minor revisions

  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions)

  • Reject

4. Editorial Decision and Feedback

The assigned editor reviews all reports and makes a final decision. Authors receive a detailed decision letter with anonymous reviewer comments. Revisions may be sent for further review.

Standard Review Timeline: 4–6 weeks (subject to reviewer response time and manuscript complexity)

Authors are expected to submit revisions within the specified timeframe to avoid delays.

????‍⚖️ Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

✅ Selection & Integrity

Reviewers are chosen for their scholarly competence, fairness, and impartiality, representing a diverse, global academic community.

???? Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential and refrain from:

  • Sharing content externally

  • Using unpublished data for personal benefit

  • Discussing content without editorial consent

⚖️ Ethical Conduct

Reviewers must:

  • Offer unbiased, constructive, and respectful feedback

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest

  • Avoid discriminatory or inappropriate comments

???? Appeals Policy

Authors may submit a formal appeal if they believe a rejection was based on:

  • Factual misunderstanding

  • Reviewer/editorial bias

  • Ethical or procedural errors

Appeals are reviewed by the Editorial Board or an independent academic for final determination.

???? Ethical Standards

ANMJ follows the ethical principles of:

  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

  • HEC Pakistan's scholarly publication policies

All participants in the review process are expected to comply with these standards.

????️ Reviewer Recognition

To acknowledge the contributions of peer reviewers:

  • ANMJ annually publishes a list of reviewers (with consent)

  • Certificates of Appreciation are available upon request

✅ Conclusion

The peer review process at ANMJ is the cornerstone of quality assurance, ensuring that each published article contributes meaningfully to the advancement of business and management scholarship. Through fairness, transparency, and rigorous evaluation, ANMJ aims to build trust within the global academic community.