PROCES DE RECENZARE
Thank you for the interest shown in our publication.
Review of Financial Studies appreciates your contribution under the form of articles, brief communications, case studies, book reviews or in any other form that can make a valuable contribution to the dynamics of the financial services industry, business sector, and finally for the whole society.
The review process is based on double blind peer review. Members of the editorial committee will make an initial assessment by nominate the referees with the appropriate expertise for a thorough analysis of the paper. The review will be made simultaneously by two members of the Scientific Council. In case of ballotage, the article is reviewed by a third party.
The referees are chosen in such a way that their specialization corresponds to the topics of the submitted papers. (Only the editor-in-chief is in charge of the peer review procedure to ensure confidentiality).
The referees evaluate the papers on the basis of the following criteria:
- Originality of the paper;
- Up to three co-authors per work;
- Proper use of the methodology;
- The results of the research are clearly presented and support the conclusions formulated by the authors at the end of the paper;
- Bibliographic sources indicate previous research that is relevant to the topic.
Both the author (s) and referees remain anonymous in the review process. Referees are not allowed to correct or edit the work they received for evaluation.
Regarding the originality of the article, the author must take appropriate steps to avoid plagiarism, regardless of its forms: involuntary, self-plagiarism, voluntary appropriation of the ideas of others.
The review process typically takes about 45 days. As a result of this process, the authors will be informed of the status of the paper: Accepted, Accepted with minor revisions, Accepted with major revisions or Rejected. As a result of this process, the authors are invited to take into account recommendations and finalize the work either to be included in the publishing queue or, possibly, to improve and continue the review process.