Peer Review Process

Business Research and Administration Innovation (BRAIN) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and relevance of all manuscripts submitted for publication. This process is crucial in maintaining the academic integrity and standards of the journal.

1. Submission and Initial Assessment:

  • Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the editorial office to ensure it meets the journal's scope and formatting guidelines.
  • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor, who oversees the peer review process.

2. Assignment to Reviewers:

  • The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor selects experts in the field (typically two or more) to review the manuscript.
  • Reviewers are chosen based on their expertise, impartiality, and absence of conflicts of interest with the authors.

3. Double-Blind Review:

  • BRAIN employs a double-blind peer review system where the identities of both the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.
  • This ensures unbiased evaluation of the manuscript based solely on its academic merit and contribution to the field.

4. Peer Review Evaluation:

  • Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript based on criteria such as originality, significance, methodology, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical guidelines.
  • Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor, addressing strengths, weaknesses, and suggestions for improvement.

5. Editorial Decision:

  • Based on the reviewers' feedback and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor makes a decision on the manuscript:
    • Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication pending minor or no revisions.
    • Revision Required: The manuscript requires revisions based on reviewer comments before a final decision can be made.
    • Rejection: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards or does not fit within its scope.

6. Author Notification:

  • Authors receive a decision notification along with detailed feedback from the reviewers. If revisions are requested, authors are provided with clear instructions for addressing reviewer comments.

7. Revision and Resubmission:

  • If revisions are required, authors revise the manuscript according to the feedback provided and submit a revised version along with a detailed response to the reviewers' comments.

8. Final Decision:

  • The Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editor evaluates the revised manuscript and decides whether it is suitable for publication in BRAIN.

9. Publication:

  • Once accepted, manuscripts undergo copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading before being published online and made accessible through the journal's website.

10. Post-Publication Review:

  • BRAIN encourages ongoing scholarly discussion and engagement with published articles. Readers and researchers are invited to provide comments, critiques, and further insights through post-publication reviews.

Ethical Considerations:

  • BRAIN adheres to strict ethical guidelines throughout the peer review process, ensuring confidentiality, fairness, and transparency in handling manuscripts.

Contact Information:

  • For questions or more information about the peer review process at BRAIN, please contact the editorial office.