Peer Review Policy
All submissions to Management Analytics and Social Insights undergo an initial editorial assessment conducted by the Editor-in-Chief and/or members of the editorial team. This stage evaluates the manuscript’s suitability in terms of scope, originality, and basic quality standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review. Authors are typically notified of the initial decision within two weeks of submission.
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are subjected to a double-blind peer review process involving at least two independent expert reviewers. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. While the journal aims to complete the peer review within four weeks, the duration may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript. The final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.

Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Their assessments support editorial decision-making and contribute to improving the quality, clarity, and rigor of the research.

Reviewers should:
Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and its content
Decline review invitations in cases of conflict of interest or insufficient expertise
Refrain from sharing or distributing the manuscript without editorial permission
Provide clear, evidence-based, and unbiased feedback
Inform the editor of any suspected ethical concerns, including plagiarism or duplicate submission
Reviewers must not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without explicit written consent from the authors.

Confidentiality
The journal upholds strict confidentiality throughout the editorial and peer review process. Editors and reviewers must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and editorial team, as appropriate.
Unpublished materials must be treated as confidential documents and must not be used for personal advantage. Confidentiality may only be breached in cases involving suspected misconduct, in accordance with established ethical guidelines.

Conflict of Interest
All participants in the peer review and publication process are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their judgments.
Reviewers should recuse themselves from evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or personal relationships with the authors or related institutions.
Editors will ensure that such conflicts are managed appropriately to maintain the integrity and impartiality of the review process.