 |
Editorial Review Board
The primary function of the Editorial Review Board is to review research articles for approval to publish in the Journal. Members of the Board are occasional referees appointed by the Editor-in-Chief on intellectual advice and guidance provided by the Advisory Board members. Members are selected to provide the editorial broad representation of backgrounds and affiliations needed to support the Editorial Policy. They review the stream of manuscripts that J Phil Econ receives. The editorial board endeavours to reach a decision on submitted articles within two months, and to publish accepted contributions once the copy-editing tasks are finalized.
The Editorial Board first evaluates submissions in-house, deciding whether to send them for single-blind peer review, which means that the reviewers' identities are concealed throughout the review process. If inappropriate, the submission will be rejected at this stage. If a manuscript passes this first stage, according to the Reviewer Guidelines, an invitation is sent to at least two reviewers, who are selected for a manuscript based on their corresponding area of expertise according to the Editorial Policy. The suggestions for the reviewers may come from authors at the time of submission. The reviewers' scoring and comments are essential in two ways: (1) they guide our decision to publish (or not) and (2) authors use them to make revisions to their papers.
At the initial invitation to review, reviewers are asked to disclose to editors any relationships or activities that could bias their opinions of the manuscript and should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. When the review is submitted, the rating grid gives reviewers an opportunity to disclose other CoIs or ones they may have realised only on reading the manuscript. They must confirm not to use knowledge of the work they’re reviewing before its publication to further their own interests.
Manuscript will be checked against the following criteria:
1. Does the paper address the J Phil Econ editorial policy towards ‘an intellectual endeavour of actively reconstructing economics by constant recourse to works of philosophy’? YES/NO
IF 'NO', How could the author(s) change the draft?
2. Has the author offered a balanced overview of the major literature while including representative works from all perspectives? Does the article reflect relevant and up-to-date research? YES/NO
IF 'NO', How could the author(s) change the draft?
3. Are the text and/or findings written clearly and accurately? YES/NO
The Editor-in-Chief, under guidance from the Editorial Board, decides on the basis of the reviews whether to publish, reject or ask for a minor or major revision and resubmit. If asked, authors revise and resubmit the manuscript taking into account the peer reviewers' feedback. The process cannot take more than two months.
|
2020-2022 List of referees |
||
|
James Alvey |
|
|
|
2018-2019 List of referees |
||
|
James Alvey |
Radu Lupu |
|
|
2017 List of referees |
||
|
Alejandro Agafonow |
William Jackson |
|
|
2015-2016 List of referees |
||
|
Gary Chartier |
David Meenagh |
|
|
2013-2014 List of referees |
||
|
Puneet Bhasin |
Paul Griseri |
|
|
2011-2012 List of referees |
||
|
Romar Correa |
Milivoj Markovic |
|
|
2007-2010 List of referees |
||
|
Andrew Alexandra |
Costea Munteanu |
|