Junior Management Science (JUMS) follows its double-blind peer review policy. All reviewers are expected to adhere to the peer review policy of JUMS while evaluating the bachelor’s and master’s theses. The review process with exception of special issues can take several months.

Process

All the theses received for publication undergo an initial screening of the department editor responsible for the field of study. The Department-Editor checks the thesis for the first time and determines whether it should proceed to the double-blind peer review process or be desk-rejected. In this phase, all submissions are verified for quality and good scientific practices (according to JUMS CoE).

Staff members who have no influence on the evaluation of the thesis will anonymize the bachelor’s or master’s theses and forward it to the double-blind peer review process, where two experts who specialize in the area of the thesis („peers”) independently evaluate the anonymized („blind”) thesis. Neither the reviewers nor the author are aware of each other’s identities. After both reviews are available, the Department-Editor makes the final decision. If the paper does not receive a desk rejection, the author will receive the ratings of both reviewers as feedback – even if your paper is not published.

The double-blind-peer-review process follows three possible outcomes:

1. Publication: If both reviewers recommend the paper for publication, JUMS will notify the author and publish it in the order of acceptance in one of its forthcoming issues.
2. Rejection: If there are two rejections, JUMS will not publish the paper but forward the anonymized reviews to the author.
3. If one reviewer provides a positive review and the other a negative review, the Department-Editor will decide whether to publish your thesis.

Selection of the Peer Reviewers

The selection of peer reviewers is solely based on their expertise in a specific domain. The reviewers are selected by the department-editor as well as in consultation with the Advisory Editorial Board. While every effort is made to have an article reviewed by two reviewers, decisions may in exceptional cases, i.e., no response from potential reviewers and follow-up reminders for more than a year, decisions may be based on the judgment of a single reviewer and the Department-Editor.

Peer Review Parameter

Peer Reviewers examine the article on the following parameters:

• Scientific relevance of the research question as well as value added to existing research
• Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources?
• Are the relevant links to theory displayed clearly and thoroughly?
• Is the employed methodology adequate and “state of the art”?
• Is the undertaken analysis correct?
• Are the selected data sets suitable for answering the research question?
• Do the analysis and the presentation of the findings meet high academic standards?
• Is the structure of the thesis concise and coherent?
• Does the writing style meet academic standards?