Editorial and Peer Review Process

The Innovation Economics Frontiers employs a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to uphold high academic and quality standards. Initially, submissions are vetted by the editorial team to ensure they align with the ethical standards and guidelines set forth by the journal. Manuscripts not adhering to these will be precluded from the review process.

Upon passing the ethical check, the Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary evaluation based on the manuscript's relevance, scope, and overall suitability for IEF . Subsequent to this assessment, selected manuscripts undergo a meticulous double-blind peer review, wherein both the identities of the reviewers and the authors remain concealed, ensuring an unbiased critique of the submission.

Each manuscript is then appraised by two expert reviewers selected for their scholarly proficiency and expertise pertinent to the manuscript's subject. The Editor-in-Chief will deliberate over the reviewers' recommendations to reach a decision regarding the manuscript's publication status.

Authors will be informed of the outcome of the review process and receive all pertinent feedback for potential revisions or improvements. IEF is committed to a swift and efficient review process, facilitated by our online submission system. Manuscripts offering new insights, theoretical advances, innovative methodologies, and substantial empirical findings are earnestly invited for submission and will receive due consideration from IEF editors.

Editorial and Peer Review Steps

Submission

1. Submission comes in.
2. Successful and Unsuccessful Submission: After receiving the submission, our managing editor will review it to ensure that it adheres to the journal's guidelines. If they discover that the submission was made correctly, it will be considered a successful submission and will be processed for desk review. Otherwise, it will be considered an unsuccessful submission. The editorial office will notify the authors about the unsuccessful submission and instruct them on how to resubmit in accordance with the journal's guidelines. Incomplete submissions will be removed from the system. 

Initial Checks / Desk Review

Following a successful submission, an in-house Managing Editor/editorial member will check all submitted manuscripts to ensure they are properly prepared and follow ethical policies, including those for human and animal experimentation. Manuscripts that don't meet the journal's ethics policy or standards are rejected before peer review. Unprepared manuscripts will be returned for revision and resubmission. The Managing Editor then consults the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors to determine if the manuscript fits the journal's scope and is scientifically sound. Then forward to the next step, such as the peer-review process. Following the desk review, the editor will notify the author via email of acceptance for review or direct rejection. This process may take 2 to 3 weeks.

Peer Review

After passing the initial screening, a manuscript will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer review. The authors' identities will not revealed to reviewers in a double-blind peer-review. Peer review comments are strictly confidential and will only be disclosed with the reviewer's express permission. 

Round 1 (Details process)

1. If accepted, the submission will be assigned to 2 reviewers.
2. A request of review indicating rejection, request for revision, or acceptance from 2 reviewers within the deadline
3. Reminder to reviewers
4. Reviews come in - wait for both
5. Thank you for mailing to the reviewers
6. 2 Reviews sent out to authors with info about the results of the review (acc, rev, or rej).
7. If revision requests for responses and revisions,
8. English editing: If the submission has linguistic errors, the author may be asked to provide linguistic corrections from any native speaker or expert.
9. Possible reminders to authors

Round 2

1. Responses and revisions come in
2. Thank you for email to the authors
3. Responses and revisions are sent to reviewers with the request for evaluation of responses and revisions (acc, rev, or rej).
4. Evaluations come in
5. Thank you for mailing to the reviewers
6. Evaluations were sent out to authors with info about the results of the review (acc, rev, or rej)

Round 3 (if necessary) (Details process)

1. New responses and revisions come in from the authors
2. Thank you for email to the authors
3. Revisions are sent to reviewers requesting a second evaluation of responses and revisions (acc, rev, or rej).
4. Second Evaluations come in (acc, rev, or rej) from reviewers
5. Thank you for mailing to the reviewers
6. Results of second reviews (acc, rev, or rej) sent to authors
7. If more revision is needed, request responses and revisions

Timeliness and Publication Volume

Activity	Timeline
Publication Volume	1 Vol. 2 issues/year
Time to First Decision	1–2 weeks
Review Time	1–2 months
Author Communication	1 week
Time to Submit Revision	2–3 weeks
Copy Editing and Production	1 month
Total Publication Time	4–6 months

Editorial Decision and Revision

All the submissions go through the double-blind peer-review process. The editor-in-chief will communicate the final decision to the corresponding author with the following status:

Acceptance with Minor Revision

Accepted papers with minor revisions based on reviewer comments will be notified to the authors and given five to ten days for minor revisions.

Reconsider after Major Revisions

The manuscript's acceptance would depend on the revisions. If some of the reviewer's comments cannot be revised, the author must provide a point-by-point response or a rebuttal. Typically, only one round of major revisions is permitted. The authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a reasonable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for additional feedback. (Round 3)

Reject and Encourage Resubmission

If additional experiments are required to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected, and the authors will be encouraged to resubmit the paper once the additional experiments are completed.

Reject

The article contains serious flaws and/or makes no significant original contribution. There is no offer of resubmission to the journal.

Copy Editing Process and Publication

After accepting and receiving the Open Access and Article Processing Charges, the manuscript will be subjected to professional copy-editing, English editing, author proofreading, final corrections, pagination, and publication on the journal's website.

Round 4 (Details process)

1. After the payment confirmation, the submission will be assigned to the copy editor/layout editor.
2. During the copy-editing process, the copy editor may request additional information about the accepted paper, copyright, author, etc. The authors are responsible for providing the required material within the time frame specified.
3. English editing: If the copy editor finds a linguistic error, the author may be asked to provide the linguistic correction from any native speaker or expert.
4. The galley proof will be distributed to the authors within the time frame specified. Authors can request more time by emailing the editorial office and explaining why.
5. Following copyediting, the submission will be sent to the production

Production and Publication

1. The file development, DOI, volume and issue assignment, and publication schedule.
2. During the production process, If authors are requested to make changes, they must pay additional editing fees.
3. Assignment to the issue of the publication.
4. Notify the authors about their successful publication.

Author Appeals

We give rights to the authors who can appeal the rejection of papers by sending an email to the journal's editorial office. The appeal must include a thorough explanation, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or editor's comments, after the advisory recommendation on the manuscript by the editor-in-chief, which may recommend acceptance, additional peer-review, or upholding the original rejection decision. At this point, a rejection decision is final and cannot be reversed.

In the case of a special issue, the journal's editor will forward the manuscript and related information to the Editor-in-Chief and guest editor, who will be asked to provide their recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, additional peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. At this point, a rejection decision is final and cannot be reversed.