All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Contemporary Economics (JCE) undergo a rigorous double-masked peer review process designed to ensure objectivity, academic integrity, and high scholarly standards. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to prevent bias and to support an impartial evaluation of submitted work.

Each submission is first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated handling editor to determine its relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, compliance with submission requirements, and overall academic quality. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage without external review.

Manuscripts deemed suitable for further consideration are evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications and research experience and must be free from any conflict of interest. Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations.

Editorial decisions are made exclusively by the Editor-in-Chief or the handling editor, based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations. Decisions may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. When revisions are required, authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and are expected to address all substantive issues raised. Revised manuscripts may be subject to additional rounds of review when necessary. The publisher does not influence editorial decisions or the peer review process.

The journal adheres to recognized standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. Any ethical concerns identified during the review process, including plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, inappropriate use of artificial intelligence tools, or other forms of academic misconduct, are handled in accordance with established best practices and relevant ethical guidelines. The use of artificial intelligence tools must be transparent and must not compromise authorship responsibility, originality, or the integrity of scholarly work.

The journal strives to maintain a thorough and timely review process, with an average review period of approximately six to eight weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity. Authors are informed of significant delays when they occur. To promote transparency, submission, revision, acceptance, and publication dates are published with each article.