Authors Guidlines

Contents

  1. Aim and Scope of the Journal
  2. Open Access Policy
  3. Publication Frequency
  4. Article Process Charges/Publication Fee
  5. Article Structure & Formatting
  6. Peer Review and Ethical Guidelines
  7. Copyrights/Licensing
  8. Plagiarism Policy
  9. Article Retraction Policy

1. Aim and Scope of the Journal

The Journal of Applied Economics and Business Studies (JAEBS) is an open access and double-blind peer reviewed journal launched under the flagship of Pakhtunkhwa Economic Policy Research InstituteAbdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Pakistan. JAEBS publishes original contributions in all fields of economics, business studies, tourism & hospitality management, applied mathematics & economics, and bio mathematics. Authors are invited to submit original, full-length empirical and theoretical papers. JAEBS encourages the application of economic and business theories to research problems facing the public and private sectors. The journal prefers quantitative and empirical studies using methods of mathematics, statistics, econometrics and operations research helping in policy assessment, formulation and development.

back to top

2. Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

back to top

3. Publication Frequency

For the year 2020 and onward JAEBS publishes four issues annually in March, June, September, and December. Occasionally, JAEBS can publish special issues about specific research themes. These special issues can have specific editors. For these special issues, specific calls for papers will be announced.

4. Article Process Charges/Publication Fee

JAEBS doesn't charge any fee for paper submission, review and publication.

back to top

5. Article Structure & Formatting

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  • The submission file is in OpenOffice, or Microsoft Word.
  • The article must consist; Title, Abstract, Keywords, JEL classification, Introduction, Literature Review, Methodology, Analysis & Discussion, and Conclusion.
  • The manuscripts language should be English, the abstract should not be more than 150 words and the overall text should be restricted to around 4000 to 7,000 words including everything i.e. bibliography, tables etc.
  • The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points as per APA style.
  • If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, the instructions in Ensuring a Blind Review have been followed.

To submit a manuscript, first make sure you have a Word file from which the title page and all author-identifying references have been included. Acknowledgments of others’ help in preparing the paper for submission should be included in the letter to the editor that is featured as part of the web-based submission process. Your entire submission (including references) is a single-spaced in 12-pitch or larger font with margins of one inch or more. Your submission contains few and only necessary footnotes or endnotes. Any hypotheses are explicitly identified as such. Constructs and variables are identified in words, not abbreviations.


Content and length of manuscripts

Constructs and variables are identified in words, not abbreviations.

  • The Editor welcomes original articles which fall within the aims and scope of the Journal, and which are as concise as the subject matter and research method permitted.
  • The manuscripts language should be English and where possible the text should be restricted to around 4000 to 7,000 words including all. 
  • The first page of the text should begin with the title, author’s name, and their affiliations, and an abstract of no more than 150 words. Plus, a list of at most three to five keywords, suitable for indexing and abstracting services. This abstract should summarize the whole paper and not the conclusions alone.
  • Manuscripts should be typed single-spaced.


Preparation of manuscripts

  • A title page should give the title of the manuscript, the author’s name, position and institutional affiliation, together with an address for correspondence; in the case of co-authors, names and affiliations and addresses should be clearly indicated. Correspondence will be sent to the first-named author unless otherwise specified. In order to enable the publisher to do everything to ensure prompt publication, the full postal and email addresses should be given for the author who will check the proofs, along with the telephone, telex and telefax numbers where possible. Any acknowledgments desired should also be placed on the cover page.
  • Figures, tables, and footnotes should be Placed Within the Text Where it is in the dod. should be reasonably interpretable without reference to the text. Footnotes should be avoided if possible; where they are used they should be numbered consecutively with superscript Arabic numerals.
  • With regard to manuscripts which refer to questionnaires or other research instruments which are not fully reproduced in the text, the author may also submit a copy of the complete research instrument. Where research instruments are not fully reproduced, a note must be inserted on the cover page indicating the address from which the complete instrument is available.
  • Hypotheses should normally be presented in the positive rather than the null form, so that each hypothesis states the result that is expected if the prior theoretical development is supported by the empirical evidence. However, where a null result provides support for a theoretical position or where no prior expectation exists, the null form is appropriate. Care should be taken to state clearly how standard statistical tests were applied (e.g. one- or two-tailed). Where possible, statistical significance should be stated to the nearest percentage point (e.g. p < 0.04) rather than at conventional levels of significance.
  • Literature citations should be made in a uniform style in text and footnotes, and follow the Harvard System with (Name, Date) in the text and an alphabetical list of references at the end of the manuscript. Please use the IJMS style for formatting your reference list:


The article in a journal:

Michel, J. G. and D. C. Hambrick (1992). ‘Diversification posture and top management team characteristics’, Academy of Management Journal, 35, pp.9-37.

Book:

Neter, J. M. H. Kutner, C. J. Nachtsheim and W. Wasserman (1996). Applied Linear Regression Models. Irwin Press, Illinois.

Chapter in book:

O’Reilly, C., R. Snyder and J. Boothe (1993). ‘Effects of executive team demography on organizational change’. In: G. Humber and W. Glick (eds.), Organizational Change and Redesign: Ideas and Insights for Improving Performance, pp. 147-175. New York: Oxford.
Works by the same author should be listed in order of publication. Where reference is made to more than one work published by the same author in a single year, a suffix, a, b, etc. should follow the date, thus: (Smith, 1989b). If an author’s name is mentioned in the text, it need not be repeated in the citation, thus ‘Hopwood (1989, p. 5) claims that…’
Please include a short author biography of 50-75 words to accompany the article.

back to top

 6. Peer Review and Ethical Guidelines

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals published by JAEBS is the process of permanent knowledge improvement. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

a) Duties of authors

  • Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.

  • Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

  • Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  • Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

  • Acknowledgment of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

  • Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

  • Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications / registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

  • Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

b) Duties of editors

  • Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

  • Fair Play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

  • Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

  • Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. For editors who require details on recommended actions for particular types of ethics complaints, please consult our Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK)

c) Duties of reviewers

  • Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. JAEBS shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

  • Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

  • Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  • Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  • Acknowledgment of sources

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 paper of which they have personal knowledge.

  • Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 papers.

  • Plagiarism and originality

Authors or contributors are required to properly cite and quote sources of literature that they used in their research articles. Plagiarism may be manifested in a variety of ways such as using another’s paper as the author’s own paper, intentional or unintentional copying or paraphrasing parts of another’s paper without citation, claiming results from research conducted by others. In order to minimize the reception and mainly the publication of plagiarized papers, JAEBS will check all submitted articles for plagiarism using Turnitin software.

  • Complaints Policy

JAEBS is committed to provide a quality service and to work in an open and accountable way that builds the trust and respect of all our stakeholders. One of the ways in which we can continue to improve our service is by responding positively to complaints, and by putting mistakes right. Stakeholders can email their quires, complaints, and suggestions at submission@jaebs.com. All quires will be responded within 7 working days.

back to top

 7. Copyrights & Licensing

The author(s) retain the copyright on work published in the Journal of Applied Economics and Business Studies and grant the journal right of first publication.  

Individual articles are published Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction on any medium, provided the original author (s) and source are properly credited.

back to top

8. Plagiarism Policy

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

The journal has policy to screen every article for similarity index by using Turnitin. The overall similarity index should be less than 15%, and a single source should not be more than 4%.

back to top

9. Article Retraction Policy

Circumstances under which JAEBS will retract an article

JAEBS is committed to playing its part in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record, therefore on occasion, it is necessary to retract articles. Articles may be retracted if:

  • There is major scientific error which would invalidate the conclusions of the article, for example where there is clear evidence that findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
  • Where the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication).
  • Where there are ethical issues such as plagiarism (appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit including those obtained through confidential review of others' manuscripts) or inappropriate authorship (e.g., "guest" authorship; see COPE discussion document 'What constitutes authorship?').
  • Where unethical research has been reported.

back to top