Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines

Author Guidelines

Authors are invited to submit manuscripts to this journal. All submissions will be evaluated by the editor to determine whether they meet the aims and scope of the journal. Submissions deemed suitable will be sent for peer review before a decision is made regarding acceptance or rejection.

Before submitting any manuscript, authors are responsible for obtaining permission to publish any material included in the submission, such as images, documents, and datasets. All authors listed on the submission must agree to be identified as authors. Where applicable, research must be approved by the appropriate ethics committee in accordance with the legal requirements of the country where the study was conducted.

The editor may reject a submission if it does not meet the minimum quality standards. Before submission, please ensure that the study design and research argument are properly organized and clearly detailed. The title must be concise, and the abstract should be self-contained and informative. Doing so will increase the likelihood of reviewers agreeing to evaluate the work. When you are confident that your submission meets these criteria, please follow the checklist below to prepare your manuscript.

Manuscript Preparation Requirements

All submissions must meet the following requirements:

  • The submission complies with the requirements stated in the Author Guidelines.

  • All references have been checked for accuracy and completeness.

  • All tables and figures are numbered and labeled appropriately.

  • Permissions have been obtained for all images, datasets, and other materials submitted with the manuscript.

Publication Regulations

  • The journal publishes innovative research characterized by originality, accuracy, and sound methodology. Manuscripts must not have been published previously in any other publication and must not constitute part of a master’s thesis or doctoral dissertation.

  • All submitted manuscripts are subject to confidential peer review by specialists, and their eligibility for publication is determined based on the reviewers’ recommendations.

  • The research must adhere to proper methodology and the fundamentals of academic writing.

  • The author must provide their name, research title, workplace, academic rank, and phone number on a separate page.

  • The manuscript must not be fewer than ten (10) pages and not exceed twenty-five (25) pages.

  • Manuscripts are published in a foreign language and must be accompanied by an abstract in Arabic.

  • The manuscript should be submitted in printed form (A4 size) along with a digital copy saved on a CD containing the full text.

  • References cited in the text should include the author’s surname, year of publication, and page number in parentheses. For example: (Al-Qurtubi, 1990, p. 50). If there are multiple authors: (Al-Qurtubi et al., 1990, p. 50). When citing multiple works by the same author, references should be listed alphabetically (e.g., Al-Qurtubi A, 1990, p. 50).

  • A list of references should be included at the end of the manuscript and arranged alphabetically, including: author(s) name(s), book title, editor (if applicable), publisher, place of publication, edition, and year of publication.

  • Authors are given one week to implement the reviewers’ and editorial board’s comments. Failure to comply within the specified timeframe will result in postponing the manuscript to a subsequent issue.

  • When using tables, each table must be placed on a separate page.

  • Submitted manuscripts will not be returned to their authors, whether accepted or rejected.

  • Manuscripts are published in the order in which they are received, provided they meet the aforementioned requirements.

  • The views expressed in submitted studies are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the journal, which bears no responsibility for them.

Articles

Section default policy

Privacy Statement

Names and Email Addresses
The names and email addresses saved on the journal’s website will be used exclusively for the purposes stated by the journal and will not be made available for any other purposes or to any third party.

Peer Review Policies

Scientific Peer Review Policies
The Accounting Studies Journal follows a set of policies that ensure the application of the main procedures granting the journal the status of a “peer-reviewed scientific journal.” This status is essential for scientific processes and contributes to the cumulative nature of science by subjecting research outputs of authors, thinkers, and scholars to a rigorous and thorough review process by specialists and experts in the same scientific field. This process includes the following policies:

  • Objective Evaluation: The review process must be conducted objectively and without bias, based solely on scientific criteria.

  • Double-Blind Review: The review process is double-blind, ensuring that both the reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other.

Reviewer Recruitment Policies

  • Academic Qualifications: Reviewers must specialize in the subject matter of the research being reviewed and are selected based on their academic background in the relevant field.

  • Research Experience: Preference is given to reviewers who have published research in the same field and possess a strong research reputation. The journal may appoint reviewers based on their research record and scholarly contributions.

  • Neutrality and Integrity: Reviewers must remain impartial and should not review any research where they have a conflict of interest or direct relationship with the authors. The review process aims to improve the quality of research, not serve personal interests.

  • Training and Guidance: Some academic journals provide training or guidelines for reviewers to ensure their understanding of the standards and policies they should follow during the review process.

  • Independent Evaluation: Reviewers should be able to evaluate research independently and comprehensively, including methodology, statistical analysis, and results.

  • Diversity of Expertise: Efforts should be made to ensure diversity among reviewers in terms of scientific and cultural backgrounds to examine research from multiple perspectives.

  • Rewards and Encouragement: Reviewers may be compensated financially as an incentive for their efforts. Additionally, moral encouragement may be provided by awarding a “Certified Reviewer Certificate” under specific conditions.

Policies Related to Plagiarism and Scientific Misconduct

The journal is committed to following policies for detecting plagiarism as follows:

  • Plagiarism Detection Policy: The journal uses plagiarism detection software and other tools to examine submitted papers for potential cases of literary theft or duplicate publication.

  • Consequences of Plagiarism: If plagiarism is detected in a manuscript, the journal will take appropriate action, which may include rejecting the paper and potentially banning future submissions to the journal.

Policies for Peer Review of Submitted Manuscripts

The journal follows the following peer review mechanism:

  1. Initial Screening: Manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo an initial review by the Editorial Board to determine eligibility for peer review within one week of submission. The Editorial Board reserves the right to decline a manuscript if it fails to meet the publication criteria, including content relevance, technical standards, or formatting requirements.

  2. Double-Blind Peer Review: Manuscripts submitted for publication are subjected to a double-blind peer review process by at least two specialized reviewers appointed confidentially by the Editorial Board.

  3. Third Reviewer Option: In the event of conflicting recommendations (e.g., one acceptance and one rejection), the Editorial Board may appoint a third reviewer, whose decision will be considered final.

Policies on Post-Review Revisions

  • Mandatory Revisions: Authors must address reviewers’ comments and make the required revisions according to the peer review forms before publication. Revisions must be completed within a specified timeframe.

  • Double Confirmation Review: This is a second review process conducted by both reviewers and the Editorial Board after the required revisions are submitted to ensure compliance with requested changes.

Policies on Disclosure of Rejection Reasons

  • Full Disclosure: In case a manuscript is rejected by the reviewers, they must provide clear reasons for the rejection to guide authors in making future improvements.