Peer-Review Policy: Reviews of Contemporary Business Analytics (RCBA)

The journal Reviews of Contemporary Business Analytics (RCBA) adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure the integrity and quality of published research. Upon submission, each manuscript is preliminarily assessed by the editorial team for its adherence to the journal's scope, significance in the field, and compliance with submission guidelines. Manuscripts not meeting these criteria are rejected outright.

Manuscripts passing the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent experts in the relevant field of business analytics. These reviewers are selected based on their scholarly reputation, expertise, and previous experience in providing constructive peer review feedback. To maintain the double-blind review process, the identities of both the reviewers and the authors are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

Reviewers are tasked with evaluating the manuscript for originality, methodological rigor, clarity, relevance, and the validity of the conclusions drawn. They are expected to provide detailed, objective, and constructive feedback which will aid authors in improving their work, and to make a recommendation for the manuscript’s disposition: accept, accept with minor revisions, revise and resubmit, or reject.

The final decision on the manuscript's publication, taking into account the reviewers' recommendations, is made by the Editor-in-Chief. The review process aims to be completed within a target timeline of 8-10 weeks from manuscript submission. Authors may be asked to revise their manuscripts to address specific concerns before final acceptance. In cases where there is significant divergence between reviewer opinions, an additional expert opinion may be sought.

Reviewer anonymity is a critical aspect of our policy, encouraging unbiased assessment. However, upon completion of the review process, if reviewers agree to disclose their identity, this can be facilitated. The journal is committed to the ongoing improvement of its peer-review system and to supporting transparency and fairness in the publication process.