Review Guidance
The main aim of the review is to support the author in the development of the manuscript submitted.
It is important to provide a constructive review with exact expectations and recommendations to assist the author.
Criteria for the selection of reviewers:
- The reviewer must not be from the same institution as the authors.
- At least one of the two reviewers must be an external expert from outside the publisher's institution.
- Reviewers will be selected who are experts with publications in the relevant subject or field.
Aspects of the review guidance
- The manuscript received for review is taken as confidential until its publication. (It cannot be used in research during the review process, and cannot be transferred to others.)
- Reviews take place in a double blind review process. The person of the reviewer must be handled confidentially, securing thereby the integrity of the review process.
- It is important to keep the review deadlines; if these cannot be kept, the reviewer assigned must inform the editorial about it.
- If a paper is reviewed in which reviewer finds plagiarism, s/he must report it immediately.
Aspects for the structure and content of the review
In the beginning of the review the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript must be highlighted, to make the author see what must be more emphasised and where interventions are necessary. This must be followed by the detailed evaluation of the manuscript, possibly marking the places of specific corrections by page numbers and paragraphs.
Quantifiable evaluation aspects can serve as guidelines also for the writing of the text of the review:
- Originality of topic
Is the paper about a research issue that is interesting and important for the wider audience as well? Has the respective issue been analysed before? Does the paper have new achievements? In order to answer these questions, reviewer should refer to databases of Google Scholar, Web of Science or Scopus.
- Hungarian researches in the topic
What publications have been issued in Hungary in the topic in the last 5 years?
- Quality of the literature review
Did the author use literature of adequate quantity and quality for the foundation of the topic? Did the literature review explore the research gaps to be filled, and did it found the research questions?
- Strategic connections
To what extent is the topic related to the strategic directions of the periodical?
- Methodology
Does the author precisely specify how data collection took place? Is data collection and analysis adequate for the research question raised? If the methodology is new or unique, is the description by the author detailed enough? Is the sample large enough? Is the analysis of the data comprehensible and accurate; is it free from mistakes?
- Relevance and findings of the paper
Is the contribution of the paper to the development of science clear? Does to the author feed the findings back to the literature reviewed? Are conclusions drawn for science, economy, society? Does the author define the limits of the paper and potential future research directions?
- Accurate wording, clarity, structure
Doe the title, the abstract and the keywords indicated precisely describe the content of the paper? Are the figures and tables necessary, sufficient, obvious and clear? Is the use of professional terms (in Hungarian or English language) correct? Is the structure of the paper comprehensible and are the proportions correct?
- Form requirements
Does the paper comply with the form and length requirements specified in the Guidelines? Are the references, tables, figures and notes correctly inserted?
Additional review aspects in case of special issues:
- Selection process and professional control
What selection process precedes the special issue? Is there a call for papers for the special issue? Do papers published in the special issue go through a double blind review process? Do you accept to share reviews with the members of the editorial board of The Hungarian Journal of Marketing and Management?
Is there a financing source for the special issue form a research project?
- Regular issue, extra issue (not following serial number), themed part
Do editors accept the non-conventional form of issue (e.g. themed block within an issue in case of fewer papers, or extra issue with independent financing)?
During the review process reviewer may also make remarks that are addressed to the editor, only, not to the author.
We are grateful for the evaluative work of the reviewers, who contribute to the development of high quality papers. The editorial team will provide and share a certificate to the reviewers via the online editorial interface.
Editorial Team of The Hungarian Journal of Marketing and Management
