Recognized By Govt of Pakistan Higher Education Commission (HEC) in HJRS "Y" Category

 

Publication Ethics

Guidelines for Reviewers

• Reviewers are not allowed personal criticism on author.
• Reviewers comment should be unbiased. Research work should be judged based on content instead of race, gender, nationality etc. Reviewer should provide comprehend and substantial review report.
• Reviewers should keep review process confidential. Information regarding peer review process should not be share with any third party.
• Reviewers are bound to evaluate all citations included in research work. Also, reviewer must inform editor in case if there exist significant similarity between submitted manuscript and already published work.

Guidelines for Authors

Authors should guarantee that the work is original and does invade the rights of any other person or entity.

• All authors of the research work are equally accountable for the content presented in the document. It is the responsibility of corresponding author to ensure that all author mentioned in research work give their consent for publication.
• Authors should provide access to data sets mentioned in the research work.
• Authors should not submit same manuscript in more than one journal at a time, also they should not submit already published work either in part or whole.
• Authors should declare potential conflict of interest (either professional of financial) related to research article. Also, authors should reveal all sources of funding for the research work.
• Authors should provide all formal documented ethical approval form from concerned ethics committee.
• Authors should cite all relevant sources utilized to gather information for their research work.

Guidelines for Editors

• Editor’s consideration about submitted manuscript should be unbiased. Editor is bound to keep peer review process confidential. Information regarding manuscript or author should not disclose to any third party.
• Editors should develop and follow consistent criteria in their peer review processes.
• Editor should put their best effort to evaluate manuscript timely and effectively.
• It the responsibility of editor to properly investigate claim about manuscript (under consideration) submission to more than one journal or already published work.
• If article in inappropriate or does not match with the scope of journal, then editor has right to reject manuscript without forwarding it to peer review process.
• Editors ought to plan to guarantee timely review process and publication and ought to stay away from superfluous postponements. Editors ought to consider how best to impart data to author about any deferrals that happen. Online publication can give the quickest course to distribution and, therefore, to setting peer inspected research (and other) data in public domain.
• The utilization of unpublished research work must take after by the written consent of the original author.

 

Copyright and Licensing

Copyright in articles published by IJBEA is retained by the author(s). Authors grant IJBEA a non-exclusive licence to publish the articles and identify itself as the original publisher.

Unless otherwise stated for third-party material, articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence. This licence permits others to share and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the author(s), a link to the licence is provided, and any changes are indicated.

IJBEA does not impose additional restrictions that modify or contradict the terms of the applicable Creative Commons licence.

Third-party material not covered by the article’s Creative Commons licence must be clearly identified, along with its copyright status and any applicable permissions or licensing terms.

 

Authorship

To give appropriate credit to each author, the individual contributions of authors should be specified in the manuscript. The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements.
It is recommended that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not usually justify authorship.
Authors wishing to make changes to authorship will be asked to complete our change of authorship form. Please note that changes to authorship cannot be made after acceptance of a manuscript.

Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an ‘Acknowledgements’ section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help or writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support.

 

Self-Archiving / Repository Policy

IJBEA permits authors to deposit and make available the following versions of their articles without an embargo:

• The submitted manuscript (preprint)
• The Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM), following peer review
• The final published article (Version of Record).

Authors may deposit these versions on personal websites, institutional repositories, subject repositories, and other non-commercial scholarly repositories. When depositing the Version of Record, authors should include the article’s full citation, DOI, and a link to the version published by IJBEA.

The Version of Record remains subject to the applicable Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence.

 

Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could influence or bias the work. Although an author may not feel there are conflicts, disclosure of relationships and interests affords a more transparent process, leading to an accurate and objective assessment of the work. Awareness of real or perceived conflicts of interests is a perspective to which the readers are entitled and is not meant to imply that a financial relationship with an organization that sponsored the research or compensation for consultancy work is inappropriate. Examples of potential conflicts of interests that are directly or indirectly related to the research may include but are not limited to the following:

• Research grants from funding agencies (please give the research funder and the grant number)
• Grants for speaking at symposia
• Financial support for attending conferences
• Financial support for educational programs
• Employment or consultation
• Support from a project sponsor
• Position on advisory board or board of directors or other type of management relationships
• Multiple affiliations
• Financial relationships, for example equity ownership or investment interest
• Intellectual property rights (e.g. patents, copyrights and royalties from such rights)
• Holdings of spouse and/or children that may have financial interest in the work

In addition, interests that go beyond financial interests and compensation (non-financial interests) that may be important to readers should be disclosed. These may include but are not limited to personal relationships or competing interests directly or indirectly tied to this research, or professional interests or personal beliefs that may influence your research.
The corresponding author collects the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors. In author collaborations where formal agreements for representation allow it, it is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors.
The corresponding author will include a summary statement on the title page that is separate from their manuscript, that reflects what is recorded in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form(s).
See below examples of disclosures:
Funding: This study was funded by X (grant number X).
Conflict of Interest: Author A has received research grants from Company A. Author B has received a speaker honorarium from Company X and owns stock in Company Y. Author C is a member of committee Z.
If no conflict exists, the authors should state:
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

 

Appeals and Complaints

The below procedure applies to appeals to editorial decisions, complaints about failure of processes such as long delays in handling papers and complaints about publication ethics. The complaint should in first instance be handled by the Editor-in-Chief(s) responsible for the journal and/or the Editor who handled the paper. Queries can be directly sent to the editor at editor@ijbea.com.
Complaint about scientific content, e.g. an appeal against rejection
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor considers the authors’ argument, the reviewer reports and decides whether

• The decision to reject should stand;
• Another independent opinion is required
• The appeal should be considered.

The complainant is informed of the decision with an explanation if appropriate. Decisions on appeals are final and new submissions take priority over appeals.
Complaint about processes, e.g. time taken to review
The Editor-in-Chief together with the Handling Editor (where appropriate) and/or in-house contact (where appropriate) will investigate the matter. The complainant will be given appropriate feedback. Feedback is provided to relevant stakeholders to improve processes and procedures.
Complaint about publication ethics, e.g., researcher's author's, or reviewer's conduct
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor follows guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor may ask the publisher via their in-house contact for advice on difficult or complicated cases. The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, he or she can submit the complaint to the Committee on Publication Ethics.

 

Corrections and Retractions

Rarely, it may be necessary for IJBEA to publish [corrections] to, or [retractions] of, articles published in its journals, so as to maintain the integrity of the academic record. It may be possible for minor corrections to published articles to be made by the original author(s) posting a comment on the published article. This would only be appropriate where the changes do not affect the results or conclusions of the article.
Corrections
Changes to published articles that affect the interpretation and conclusion of the article, but do not fully invalidate the article, will, at the Editor(s)’ discretion, be corrected via publication of an Erratum that is indexed and linked to the original article. Changes in authorship of published articles are corrected via an Erratum.
Retractions
On rare occasions, when the scientific information in an article is substantially undermined, it may be necessary for published articles to be retracted. IJBEA will follow the COPE guidelines in such cases. Retraction articles are indexed and linked to the original article.

 

Misconduct

IJBEA takes seriously all allegations of potential misconduct. If there is a suspicion of misconduct, If, after investigation, the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. If misconduct has been established beyond reasonable doubt, this may result in the Editor-in-Chief’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:

• If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.
• If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction, either an erratum will be placed with the article or in severe cases retraction of the article will occur. The reason must be given in the published erratum or retraction note. Please note that retraction means that the paper is maintained on the platform, watermarked “retracted” and explanation for the retraction is provided in a note linked to the watermarked article.
• The author’s institution may be informed.

IJBEA will follow the COPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of potential publication misconduct.

 

CrossMark Policy

CrossMark is a Crossref service that provides a standard way for readers to identify the status of published content. By displaying the CrossMark logo on its articles, the International Journal of Business and Economic Affairs (IJBEA) demonstrates its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and informing readers of relevant post-publication changes.

Clicking on the CrossMark logo enables readers to verify the status of an article. Where applicable, the CrossMark record may also provide information about corrections, updates, retractions, and other changes to the published Version of Record, as well as additional publication history information.

IJBEA is committed to communicating relevant post-publication changes transparently and ensuring that readers can access reliable information about the status of its published content.

For further information, please visit the CrossMark website.

 

Similarity and Plagiarism Screening

Manuscripts submitted to IJBEA may be screened using Turnitin or other appropriate similarity-detection tools as part of the editorial assessment process. Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team and are not used as the sole basis for rejection. If concerns arise regarding inappropriate textual overlap, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other potential misconduct, the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with its publication ethics and research misconduct policies.

 

Instructions for Authors

Authors are required to format their manuscript as per guidelines define by the journal.

• Research papers are accepted in English language only.
• Manuscript should be submitted in word form only.
• Document should be double space.
• Minimum acceptable length is 4000-8000 words.

Manuscript should be compiled as follow:

Title Page
Title page should include author names, affiliation and email addresses. Corresponding author should be identified.

Section Headings should be concise and bold-face. Divide your manuscript in clear sections.

Title, Keywords, and Abstract

The title, keywords, and abstract are critical in ensuring that readers locate your work online. Articles and essays should be accompanied by an interesting abstract of no more than 300 words (maximum): A good abstract describes the content offered in the paper, including the topic or focus, the type of study reported (e.g., conceptual, empirical, qualitative, field, network study, etc.), the context, the primary data source, and the most important findings and contributions. The better your abstract, the easier it will be for others to recognize, read, and build on your work.

With the abstract, 5 to 7 keywords should be provided.

Introduction

[500-1000 words]

In introduction section you must provide theoretical background, indicating importance of research work, specific research question and objectives of the study. Provide in-text references in APA style for all the facts that are presented here.

Literature Cited

[1000-1500 words]

This section offers information on the range of other studies cited. The literature review section is helpful for generating a list of background reading on the topic under study. Minimum 15-20 good and recent works (references) should be presented here.

Material and Methods

[500-1000 words]

Include methodological orientation [grounded theory, discourse analysis, content analysis] Sampling [number of participant, Method of approach, where the data was collected] Data collection [interview, questionnaire] and data analysis. Techniques already published ought to be shown by a reference: Only significant amendments should be described.

Results

[500-1000 words]

Results should be clear and concise. The results section contains the data gathered during experimentation.

Tables and Figures

Tables and figures help improving both pursuer’s comprehension of data and the productivity of its presentation. However, generally as excessively numerous figures and tables can take away from the general account. We encourage the thoughtful utilization of tables and figures and discourage their overuse. Number tables and figures consecutively (one series for tables, one for figures). Indicate the position of each in the text as follows:

Discussion

[500-1000 words]

This should explore the significance of the results of the work. The discussion section will explain the authors interpret their data and how they associate it to published work. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature.

Conclusion

Study should be concluded in this section along with implications, limitation of research study and future direction based on limitations.

Limitations and Study Forward

No study covers all aspect of the research problem. Author should discuss the limitations or gaps of this study. And also present future scope or plan of the study.

Acknowledgment

Include a note before reference list page, if you wish to recognize financial support, any other help, or the useful input gave by the reviewers or the editor. Footnotes should be placed on respective pages.

References

Ensure consistency among in-text and end references. End references should be arranged alphabetically.

• In-text citations are acknowledged with Author (Year) or (Author, Year). Multiple authors.
  For example:
  Green and Tull (2008) revealed that in developing new product.
• For two authors provide both names every time. While for three through five authors all names are included first time, after that et al will be used in subsequent citations.
  First citation: Rai, Ruppel and Lewis (2005) have stated that the difference between a winner.
  Subsequent citation: Rai et al. (2005) who maintained that the primary difference.

• For six or more authors, use “et al.” even for the first citation.
  Direct Citation: Koontz et al. (2007). Czrl and Belovecz (2007) stated that maintaining.
  Indirect Citation: (Koontz et al., 2012). Maintaining their existing ones (Czrl & Belovecz, 2007) For book: (Hayler & Nichols, 2007, p. 12).

• Minimum 30 good quality references required with cross ref DOI.
• All references should be in APA edition and present inside the main body of article. Don’t put extra references which are not cited.

REFERENCE LIST

Books

Author, A., & Author, B. (Year). Title of the work. Place name: Publisher. Hayler, R., & Nichols, M. D. (2007). Six sigma for financial services (2nd ed). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Chapter in a Book

Author, A., & Author, B. (Year). Chapter title. In A. Editor, B. Editor, & C. Editor (Eds.), Title of the book (pp.xx-xx). Place name: Publisher.

Marker, F. J., & Marker, L. (2009). Strindberg in the theatre. In M. Robinson (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to August Strindberg. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Journal Article

Author, A., & Author, B. (Year). Article title. Title of Periodical, x(x), pp-pp.

Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75-105.

Working Paper

Kang, D. (2000). Family ownership and performance in public corporations: A study of the U.S. fortune 500, 1982–1994 (Working Paper No. 00-0051). Harvard Business School, Boston, MA.

Dissertation

Healey, D. (2005). Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and creativity: An investigation into their relationship (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Proceedings

Lodhi, A., Koppen, V., & Saake, G. (2013). Business process improvement framework and representational support. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Intelligent Human Computer Interaction (IHCI 2011), Prague, Czech Republic,August, 2011 (pp. 155-167), Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Web page

New Zealand Teachers Council. (2004). Code of ethics for registered teachers. Retrieved from http://www.teacherscouncil.govt.nz/required/ethics/codeofethics.stm

 

 

Peer Review Process

IJBEA operates a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening to assess their relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, scholarly quality, compliance with the author guidelines, originality, and potential ethical concerns. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are normally sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript’s originality, theoretical and/or practical contribution, methodological rigor, quality of analysis, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the field. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts they review.

Following peer review, a manuscript may be accepted, returned for minor or major revisions, or rejected. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, where appropriate. If reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the handling editor may seek an additional independent review.

The Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor makes the final editorial decision based on the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses, and the manuscript’s compliance with IJBEA’s scholarly and ethical standards.

Manuscripts submitted by editors or editorial board members are handled by an independent editor who has no conflict of interest with the authors. The submitting editor or editorial board member is not involved in reviewer selection or the editorial decision.

 

Open Access Policy

IJBEA is a fully open-access journal. All scholarly articles are made immediately and permanently available online without subscription fees, registration requirements, access charges, or embargo periods.

Users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to, index, crawl, and otherwise use published articles in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence.

 

 

Article processing charges (APC)

International Journal of Business and Economic Affairs (IJBEA) does not charge any submission, editorial processing, page, colour, or review fee. An Article Processing Charge (APC) of USD 300, plus applicable taxes where required, is payable only after a manuscript has successfully completed peer review and has been formally accepted for publication.

Payment of the APC has no influence on the peer-review process or editorial decision. Editors and reviewers are not informed of, or influenced by, an author's ability to pay during the evaluation of a manuscript.

No payment is required at the time of manuscript submission.

Questions regarding publication charges may be directed to editor@ijbea.com.

Source of Funding

Source of Funding / Journal Business Model