Central European Economic Journal (CEEJ) is dedicated to fair, fast, and
professional double-blind peer review. We make every effort to ensure that the
review process runs in a timely manner. CEEJ tries to offer their authors
timely advice on how to make the manuscripts as useful for prospective readers
Successful submissions combine state-of-the-art
theories with convincing empirical verification. Therefore, we expect that a
referee report indicates what theory (or theories) the author relies on. It
would be of particular importance to see an expert opinion on whether the
theory (theories) applied in the paper are referred to adequately, and whether
the references are relevant without a doubt. In particular, we are grateful if
the referees confirm that what the author sees as the value added of his/her
paper indeed addresses a salient issue that has not been analysed in the
literature so far.
CEEJ acknowledges the fact that there may be
contributions where a novel idea or a concept is so important and striking that
empirical material is of secondary importance. However, a more likely case is
that the idea is not revolutionary, but the paper verifies a known concept
against some new empirical data. In this case, the referees are expected to
determine whether the verification replicates something that can be found in
the literature, or perhaps new interesting aspects are discovered.
Most papers end with a concluding section. The
author summarizes what he/she did and what his/her suppositions imply for
economic theory and economic policy. The referees are expected to discuss
whether the conclusions are justified by the theory and empirical material
applied or, perhaps, even more, general statements could be attempted.
To structure comments reported by reviewers,
CEEJ provides a review form, in which reviewers refer to the aims and
contribution of the research, the literature sources used, the applied theory,
research design and methods, and the results obtained.
General comments are also necessary in order to
judge whether the paper can be published. On top of that many reviewers detect
arithmetic mistakes, strange abbreviations (obvious to some specialists only),
unclear definitions, etc. Such technical comments are also very valuable, both
for the author and the editors of CEEJ.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through
the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in
improving the manuscript.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported
in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should
immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential
documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if
authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author
is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited
by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had
been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A
reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity
or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published
data of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept
confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider
evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from
competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of
the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.
acknowledge the support of our reviewers who devoted their time and attention
to assess the papers submitted to our journal in the past years.
Reviewers in 2021
Reviewers in 2020
Reviewers in 2019
Reviewers in 2018
Reviewers in 2017
University of Warsaw, Poland
Advisory Board Chairman
University of Queensland, Australia
Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania
Anna Maria Ferragina
University of Salerno, Italy
Metropolitan University Prague, Czech Republic
University of Vermont, USA
Wilfrid Laurier University and RCEA, Canada
open access journal
University of Warsaw,
Faculty of Economic Sciences,
00-241 Warsaw, Poland