Peer Review Policy

The Journal of Digital Innovation and Multidisciplinary Business Research employs a double-blind review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout. The journal commits to making timely decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s aims and scope or fail to meet editorial standards will not proceed to the review stage.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are essential to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and must adhere to the following guidelines:

• Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious factors. If such conflicts exist, they should decline the review request.
• Timeliness: Reviewers should promptly respond to invitations to review and only accept if they can complete the review within the specified timeframe. If their availability changes, they should notify the journal immediately and, if possible, suggest alternative reviewers.
• Conducting a Review: Reviewers should carefully read the manuscript and any supplementary materials, as well as the reviewer instructions, while maintaining the confidentiality of the review process.
• Ethics Violations: If reviewers suspect any ethical breaches, such as research misconduct or plagiarism, they should contact the journal editor right away and avoid conducting their own investigation.
• Transferability of Peer Review: Reviewers may be asked to transfer their reviews to other journals within the same publisher’s portfolio. If they agree, they should submit their original review along with notes on any changes and differences in evaluation criteria.

Preparing a Review Report

Reviewers should adhere to the journal’s guidelines for preparing and submitting reviews. Reports should be objective, constructive, and detailed, providing feedback that assists authors in enhancing their manuscripts. Reviewers should thoroughly examine the manuscript and any supplementary files, seek clarification from the editor on unclear points during the review, and treat all aspects of the review process as confidential. They should report any suspected violations of publication ethics to the editor without delay.

Reviewers must avoid making hostile, inflammatory, or defamatory comments and ensure that their recommendations whether to accept, revise, or reject are consistent with their feedback. They should respect the authors’ writing style and suggest changes solely to enhance clarity, distinguishing between necessary additional analyses and those that simply extend the work. Reviews should be conducted independently, unless permission is granted to involve others. Reviewers should not unnecessarily delay the review process or propose citations solely to increase their own citation metrics.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors also have important responsibilities in upholding the integrity of the scholarly record, including:

• Conflicts of Interest: Authors must declare any potential conflicts of interest, whether personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious.
• Timeliness: Authors should promptly respond to review comments and complete any necessary revisions within the proposed timeframe. If their circumstances change, they must inform the editor.

Post-Review Considerations

Reviewers should be open to reviewing revised or resubmitted manuscripts and respond quickly to journal inquiries. They should inform the journal of any new information that could impact their original review. Additionally, reviewers must continue to uphold the confidentiality of the review process even after it has concluded.