The Journal of State Economic Research (JSER) employs a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scholarly rigor of all submitted manuscripts. This method is fundamental to the journal's commitment to academic integrity and fairness. The entire process is conducted online through the journal's Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

Stage 1: Initial Screening and Editorial Assessment

1. Manuscript Submission: Authors submit their manuscripts via the JSER's online submission system. Upon submission, the manuscript undergoes an initial check by the editorial team.

2. Plagiarism Check: The editor-in-chief or a designated managing editor first screens the manuscript for plagiarism using software such as Turnitin or a similar tool. Manuscripts with an unacceptably high similarity index are rejected immediately.

3. Scope and Formatting Check: The editorial team assesses the manuscript's suitability for the journal's scope and ensures it adheres to the submission guidelines, including proper formatting, referencing style, and academic language. Manuscripts that fail to meet these basic requirements may be desk-rejected without further review.

Stage 2: Peer Review

1. Reviewer Invitation: If the manuscript passes the initial screening, the editor-in-chief assigns it to at least two independent expert reviewers. The reviewers are chosen based on their expertise and research background, which should align with the manuscript's topic.

2. Double-Blind Review: The double-blind process means that both the authors' identities are concealed from the reviewers, and the reviewers' identities are concealed from the authors. This anonymity is crucial for promoting unbiased and objective evaluation.

3. Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers are asked to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the manuscript based on several key criteria, including:

   • Originality: The novelty and contribution of the research to the field of state economic research.

   • Significance: The importance and relevance of the research findings.

   • Methodology: The soundness and appropriateness of the research methods used.

   • Clarity and Structure: The logical flow, coherence, and clarity of the writing.

   • Literature Review: The thoroughness and accuracy of the background and literature review.

   • Data Analysis: The correctness and interpretation of the data analysis.

   • Conclusion: The validity of the conclusions and whether they are supported by the results.

Stage 3: Decision and Revision

1. Consolidation of Reviews: The editor-in-chief collects the feedback from all assigned reviewers. Based on these reviews, the editor makes a final decision on the manuscript.

2. Possible Decisions: The editor's decision will fall into one of the following categories:

   • Accept Submission: The manuscript is suitable for publication without any or only minor revisions.

   • Revisions Required: The manuscript has potential but needs significant improvements based on the reviewers' feedback. Authors are given a specific timeframe to revise their manuscript.

   • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires major revisions and must be sent back to the reviewers for a second round of evaluation.

   • Decline Submission: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal, even with significant revisions.

3. Communication with Authors: The editor communicates the decision to the corresponding author, along with the anonymized reviewer comments.

4. Final Submission: If revisions are required, authors must submit a revised manuscript and a detailed response to the reviewers' comments, explaining how they addressed each point. The editor then makes a final decision based on the revised submission.

The JSER peer-review process is designed to be rigorous yet constructive, aiming to improve the quality of submitted manuscripts and ensure that only high-quality, impactful research is published. The typical timeline for the review process from submission to the first decision is approximately 2 to 3 months.