Article Evaluation Process

  1. Once a manuscript is submitted to the ASES INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ECONOMY (INTECO), it undergoes an initial editorial review. If deemed appropriate, the manuscript is screened for plagiarism. Only those that pass the plagiarism check proceed to the peer review stage.
  2. Manuscripts submitted to (INTECO) must include the following author details: full name(s), academic title(s), institutional affiliation(s), department, city of the institution, and ORCID ID(s). During the peer review process, all identifying author information is removed by the editors to ensure a double-blind review.
  3. All submissions are first evaluated by the editors for compliance with the journal's formatting and publication guidelines. If revisions are needed, the manuscript is returned to the author for correction. If no issues are found, it is sent directly for peer review.
  4. Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal’s submission guidelines are rejected without being sent for peer review.
  5. Submissions lacking scientific content or not contributing to academic knowledge are not accepted and are returned to the author following editorial review.
  6. The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential in accordance with the double-blind peer review policy.
  7. Reviewers are expected to evaluate submitted manuscripts within a maximum of 30 days. If no report is received within this period, a new reviewer is assigned.
  8. Manuscripts that receive favorable reviews are deemed eligible for publication.
  9. Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria. Authors may access reviewer comments and feedback through the journal’s system:
    • Consistency between title and content
    • Scientific rigor and originality
    • Appropriateness of language and expression
    • Scope and treatment of the topic
    • Thematic coherence
    • Use of original and primary sources
    • Access to recent scientific studies and references
    • Contribution to the field
    • Mastery of terminology
    • Clarity, style, readability, and flow
    • Achievement of conclusions
  10. Reviewers may request to re-evaluate a revised manuscript before publication. If such a request is made, the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for final approval.
  11. Authors have the right to appeal reviewer decisions with reasonable justification and supporting evidence. In such cases, the editorial board may consult a different reviewer for an additional opinion.
  12. Authors can track the progress of their submissions at every stage of the evaluation process through their account. Since the system allows only one round of revision submission, authors are advised to wait for the completion of all peer reviews before making changes.
  13. Editors monitor the implementation of reviewer-recommended revisions and make final decisions on the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
  14. During submission, authors are required to agree to the journal’s copyright policy. However, the editorial board may request a signed copyright transfer agreement when necessary.
  15. Articles published in (INTECO) may be used with appropriate citation of the journal. Unauthorized use without citation is subject to legal action. All legal responsibility lies with the user.