The practice of peer review is intended to ensure that only best articles are published. Like all reputable scientific journals,  Empirical Economic Review (EER) has an objective to guarantee the excellence in scholarly publications. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the EER, that’s why all incoming manuscripts are peer reviewed by following the procedure outlined below;

Manuscript Evaluation

EER employs ‘double blind’ reviewing, in which the referees remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout the review process.

One of the Editorial board member first of all evaluates submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts rejected at this stage may be insufficiently original, have serious flaws, have poor grammar or English language, are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those which meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least two relevant and expert referees for reviewing.
 The authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage are informed within three to six weeks of receipt.

Referee Selection

Before sending a manuscript to review process, referees are matched to it according to it according to their expertise. As our reviewer database is constantly being updated, we welcome suggestions for referees from the author(s), though such non-binding recommendations are not necessarily used.

Referees Report

Referees are asked to evaluate a manuscript whether it:

• Is original as to thought and method (including data)
• Is methodologically sound
• Has results that are clearly presented and support the conclusions
• Cites correctly and exhaustively references of previous relevant work
• Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
• Add clearly to the knowledge and development of the field

Language correction is not part of the peer-review process, but referees are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style to the manuscript.