For consideration, all manuscripts should be submitted by online system of the Journal of Applied Microeconometrics (JAME) at The whole editorial process of the journal is carried out via online submission system, and can be documented in case of a conflict or objection.

The suitability of papers for publication in the journal is decided by the editorial policy of the editorial board.

Editor-in-Chief is fully authorized for reviewing process, which is processed in the order of submission to The Journal.

Editor-in-Chief assigns the Co-Editor or herself in order to perform initial assessment. Then, the assignee conducts initial pre-refereeing checks to ensure the article is legible, complete, correctly formatted, original, within the scope of the journal, in the style of a scientific article and written in clear language.

JAME is a member of Crosscheck, and all manuscripts are screened by Crosscheck in terms of originality. If serious issues are identified concerning the manuscript, the assignee will notify the corresponding author as part of our standard procedure. No action is required from you unless specifically requested for very serious concerns.

Any article that has problems with any of the above criteria may be rejected at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage typically are not in line with the focus and scopes of the journal. Essays that pass through this stage are then entered into the peer review process.

JAME adheres to a strict policy of double-blind, peer-review to ensure best practices in scholarly research and publication. In double-blind model, the reviewers do not know the names of the author, and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript. To ensure anonymity in the double-blind refereeing process, the author's name should not appear anywhere on the manuscript. Once blinded, the assignee selects at least two reviewers, and manuscripts are shared with these experts within the field for double-blind peer review, in which both the Reviewer and the Author remain anonymous throughout the process.

After the assignment, the reviewers are invited to participate to the review process via a notification email. The reviewers are asked to log into the journal web site to indicate whether they will undertake the review or not within 7 days of the review request. Automated reminder emails are sent to the reviewer if the reviewer does not respond to a review request within 7 days. If  the reviwers accept to review the manuscript, they can log into the journal system to access the submission and to record their review and recommendation.

The typical period of time allowed for reviewers is 4 weeks but note that it can be modified during the editorial process.

Reviewers make one of the following recommendations to the Editors: accept submission, revisions required, resubmit for review, resubmit elsewhere, decline submission. Additionally, reviewers are asked to provide significant commentary for authors and are also provided space to make comments intended solely for the editors.

If a paper is not suitable for publication it will be returned to the author with a statement of reasons for rejection. The author may appeal if he or she believes an erroneous or unfair judgment has been made. A letter to the Editor-in-Chief presenting reasons why the decision should be reconsidered will be subjected to due consideration.

After the review, the author is notified by an email for revision in accord with suggestions made by the reviewers and the Editor. At the completion of each round of the peer review process, the submitter receives a formal letter from the Editor that includes notes from the Peer Reviewers.

When authors make revisions to their article in response to the referees' comments they are asked to submit a list of changes and any replies for transmission to the referees. The author must upload the revised manuscript to the online system within 4 weeks; otherwise the author will be notified that the paper will be considered withdrawn.

The revised version is usually returned to at least one of the original referees who is then asked whether the revisions are satisfactory. If the referees remain dissatisfied, the paper can be referred to the advisory board of the journal for further consideration.

The assignee then, will check if the manuscript is revised as suggested by editorial members and proceed to the next step. If the assignee finds the revisions satisfying, then he or she will record the decision to accomplish the review process and reach final decision.

Based upon two or more reviewers' reports, the Editor is responsible for making the decision regarding acceptance or rejection each essay and for communicating this decision to the submitter. At the completion of the peer review process, each submitter receives a formal letter from the Editors that includes notes from the Peer Reviewers. Authors are notified by e-mail when a manuscript has or has not been accepted for publication. Proofs of accepted manuscripts are sent to the author for correction within 4 weeks after acceptance. They should be proofread carefully according to the instructions attached and returned within the considered period. Authors will be charged for major corrections to their proofs.