The International Journal of Wealth Management (IJWM) operates a double-blind peer-review process. This means that the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process, ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit.
How the process works
- Initial editorial screening. Every submission is first reviewed by the editors to confirm that it falls within the journal’s scope and meets basic standards of scholarly presentation.
- Independent peer review. Manuscripts that pass screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodological soundness, and contribution to the field, without knowing the authors’ identities.
- Revision rounds. Based on reviewers’ comments, authors may be asked to revise their manuscript. Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers for re-evaluation.
- Final editorial decision. Taking reviewers’ recommendations into account, the editors make the final decision to accept or decline the manuscript. Authors are informed of the decision along with the reviewers’ anonymized comments.
IJWM is committed to a fair, rigorous, and constructive review process. Reviewers are expected to treat manuscripts as confidential documents and to disclose any conflicts of interest that might compromise the objectivity of their assessment.