Peer Review Process

All submissions to Contemporary Accounting Perspectives (CAP) undergo an initial editorial screening followed by a double-blind peer-review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

After submission, each manuscript is first reviewed by the editorial team to determine whether it fits the aims and scope of the journal and complies with the author guidelines, formatting requirements, ethical standards, and basic academic quality criteria.

Manuscripts that are outside the journal’s scope, do not meet academic or ethical standards, or fail to comply with submission requirements may be desk rejected before peer review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers for evaluation. CAP applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on originality, academic contribution, methodological rigor, theoretical and/or practical relevance, clarity of presentation, literature engagement, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewer reports and editorial evaluation, the possible editorial decisions may include:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Resubmit for Review
Reject

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer recommendations, editorial assessment, and the journal’s publication standards.

Revisions

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript together with a response explaining how reviewer and editorial comments have been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when necessary.

Confidentiality and Objectivity

All manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and related documents are treated as confidential materials. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and fair evaluations. Reviewers must decline review invitations if they have a conflict of interest or if the manuscript falls outside their area of expertise.

Final Responsibility

The editorial team is responsible for ensuring that the peer-review process is fair, transparent, confidential, and consistent with international publication ethics standards.