This manual is a general guide to help you in writing academic paper of international standards

Journal of International Economic Policy

Manual for Authors and Reviewers

Contents:

Why write and review articles for a peer-review journal?

I. AUTHORS

A.Substance

1. Framing a question/thesis/argument

2. Originality

3. Strength of Argument

4. Documentation

5. Time Allocation

6. Revisions

B.Organization and Style

1. Organization

2. Style

Usage

Abbreviations/Acronyms

Capitalization

3. Grammar and Spelling

4. Citations, Notes and References

Plagiarism

How to Recognize Unacceptable and Acceptable Paraphrases

C.Submitting an Article

1. Guidelines

2. Submission

3. Post-submission

II. REVIEWERS

Appendices

This manual is a general guide for authors and reviewers unfamiliar with international standards of the anonymous peer-review process and who are considering publishing articles in periodicals / journals, including the Journal of International Economic Policy, that subscribe to these standards and process. Although some parts of the manual are devoted to writing an academic article and other parts to reviewing academic articles, we strongly believe that studying the whole manual will be equally beneficial to both authors and reviewers interested in learning about and understanding the anonymous peer-review process and how to write academic papers and articles according to international standards.

The goal of the manual is to give you a clear understanding of the publishing process, from its beginning, when a scholar has an idea he/she would like to write about, to the published article. Understanding the process for submission of an article and its review will make you a better author and a better peer reviewer.

Why write and review articles for a peer-review journal?

Before we begin, we would like to take a moment to explain why it is in your interest to contribute to the Journal of International Economic Policy specifically and anonymous peer-review journals generally. First, as an academic and researcher, you will want to share your research with as broad a community as possible, the broadest of which is of course the international academic community. By gaining access to this community, you will develop invaluable partnerships and networks beyond your national base, deepen your field of specialization, contribute to a larger knowledge-base, raise your profile and enhance your credibility. However, in order to access this community, it is important to participate in and become familiar with its practices and standards. These practices and standards include the anonymous peer-review process.

As a member of the scholarly community, you have an obligation to share your research findings and your intellectual efforts by publishing them.

Second, publishing articles in anonymous peer-review journals will assist in career mobility and advancement. While career advancement may certainly have national characteristics, such as those in Ukraine which should continue to be respected, these national characteristics may have little in common with the criteria for career advancement in other countries or systems. As a result, an academic trying to branch out and establish him/herself outside of the national base will find him/herself being judged according to standards and criteria about which he/she has little knowledge and in which he/she has had little experience and opportunities. One such standard and criteria is publishing in anonymous peer-review journals, widely considered to be the best measurement of an academic’s credentials and credibility and, thereby, of his/her merit for career advancement and promotion. Thus, to advance in one’s career – if such career plans include branching out internationally – then publishing in anonymous peer-review journals is essential. Otherwise, the career trajectory will be limited.

Finally, reviewing articles for a peer-review journal is also a very good way of developing one’s own expertise, learning about other research and new developments, and building a community of professionals in international economics. Moreover, reading works by others will improve one’s own writing skills.

As mentioned above, this manual is for authors and reviewers. We begin with information for authors.

I. Authors

Any written material can be judged according to international standards on two things: first, the message it carries, or the substance, and second, how the message is carried out, or the style. Both the substance and style need to be very good for an article to be published in a journal subscribing to international standards, such as the Journal of International Economic Policy. Some authors may be familiar already with this information, but it is always worthwhile to review.

Part A: Substance

1. Framing a question/thesis/argument

Before you sit down to write you have to know what the substance of your paper is, or in other words what your paper is about. What aspects of international economic issues, including trade, investment, management, monetary stability, reform, cooperation, law, political economy, international financial institutions as well as security which face developed, transition and developing states fascinate you? What questions posed by the international economics have not been answered yet? What would you like to brainstorm about and begin an intellectual discussion on?

2. Originality

The more original the issue you choose to write about and your study of that issue, the more likely you will find a receptive audience and a publisher. As a result, when you find an interesting issue to write about, you must ensure that you have something new to say about it that others who write on that same issue may not have already covered. If your article happens to be just another statement on a topic already published by others, the value of your contribution to understanding that issue is diminished and you are less likely to find a better quality audience and / or publisher.

3. Strength of Argument

Your main argument must be sound, based on well-developed and clearly presented supporting arguments, and meaningfully conclude. At the same time, you must remember that you are limited to 20-25 pages of text, or 5000 words (look at <… insert hyperlink and website address to Styleguide here …>); thus, your paper must argue its point and conclude within these limits. In this respect, keep in mind that a topic suitable for a thesis or dissertation of a hundred to three hundred pages is not suitable for an article in an academic journal.

4. Documentation

The strength of your argument and paper will also be determined according to the amount of research you have carried out and cite in your paper. Uncited statements and references to facts, statistics and other research is unacceptable according to international standards. Such information and material must be documented. Make sure that you have access to the information necessary to support your arguments. Give yourself time to examine the evidence and the background literature as you prepare the article. (See also in this manual the section on Plagiarism for related information on avoiding improper and unacceptable use of sourced material.)

5. Time allocation

Think about how much time you have for research, writing and organizing your paper. Organize your ideas and notes so that when you start writing you do not spend much time looking over your notes trying to find a quote or reference.

6. Revisions

Revise your article before you submit it, and then revise some more. Some authors find it beneficial to have a qualified colleague read the article or to present the paper at a conference before it is submitted for consideration by the Journal to help the author deal with any areas of weakness before the article undergoes the formal review process. Leave yourself time to make corrections. You may spot some paragraphs that need re-writing or expanding. You may also move sentences or paragraphs around to strengthen the organization of your paper.

Proof-read, proof read, proof-read!

PART B: Organization and Style

The organization and style of your article are very important because, despite a very interesting thesis and good evidence to support your argument, your paper will not be acceptable for publication if it is not organized according to international practice. Accordingly, an academic paper, like any written material, has to have a flow: the reader must be able to follow your argument and understand your logic. The argumentation behind your thesis should be clear, not only to you, but to everyone who reads your article.

1. Organization

The general structure of an academic article consists of three parts: an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. In the introduction, the author outlines the problem examined, thesis and/or main argument related to the problem, the article’s major purpose, and the relationship with theoretical or policy issues. To emphasize, stating the thesis and/or main argument in the introduction is essential. A very good introduction will do just that: introduce the article to the reader by informing the reader what the article is about and by giving the reader enough relevant information about the article to assist him/her in deciding whether the article is of interest. In this respect, a good introduction will stand out from the rest of the paper and can be read on its own. In general, the introduction should not be more than 2-3 pages.

Editors of scholarly journals agree that one of the most common and frustrating problems with submitted articles is a failure on the part of the authors to express their thesis clearly and early in the article.

In the body, the author carries out his/her argument. Each supporting argument is presented and clearly developed according to paragraphs and/or sections identifiable with section headings. In presenting these supporting arguments, the author demonstrates his/her knowledge of the latest research and publications on the problem, cites the research that supports the article’s argument or which he/she is disputing, and proposes a solution to the problem. It is in this part of the paper where the author will demonstrate the credibility of the paper, particularly with ample citation of sources and the ideas and materials of other scholars. In general, the body should be approximately 15-20 pages.

Structure demands that in a good paper not only should each sentence be well written and make sense; it should also be logically connected to the sentences around it, each paragraph to the paragraph around it, each section to the section around it, and all of them to the overall theme of the paper.

Finally, in the conclusion the author provides a summary of the paper, considers the larger theoretical and/or policy implications of the findings, and may offer suggestions for future research. The conclusion should not introduce new ideas or arguments, but stay relevant to the article and argument just presented. In general, the conclusion should not be more than 2-3 pages.

2. Style

Style is difficult on which to offer advice because it is such a personal matter and an expression of the individual. However, there is general agreement about which writing styles make for a stronger academic article. Below are some style guidelines for publications of the Centre for Trade Policy and Law in Ottawa which you may find helpful.

Usage:

· Use the active voice whenever possible rather than the passive voice. The active voice is more vigorous, direct, and easier to read. However, sometimes the passive voice is essential.

· Write in a positive rather than a negative form. The positive is more straightforward, vigorous, and brief. For example, illegal is stronger than not legal.

· Be as specific as possible in all time references. Avoid time references that might confuse the reader or date the work unnecessarily. When possible use specific dates. Use the 1980s instead of the last decade, or give the specific year instead of last year. Last year would be misleading for someone reading a 1992 publication in 1995. Also, avoid the word recently.

· Write in clear and simple language.

· Avoid jargon whenever possible. Explain in the text or in a footnote terms or phrases which may be unique or highly specialized and that may be unknown to the well-informed generalist.

· Avoid laborious phrases, non-working and needless words. For example, if or should is better than in the event that. Avoid phrases such as close proximity (use instead near), or end result (use instead result), at this point in time (use instead at this time, or, now).

Abbreviations/Acronyms:

· In the first instance, always spell out the full name or term and follow it with the abbreviation or acronym in parentheses. For all succeeding references, use the abbreviation or acronym alone. It is best to use abbreviations and acronyms sparingly to avoid confusion.

· Omit periods in abbreviations (US, OECD, CTPL, WTO) and acronyms (NATO, NAFTA, UNICEF, UNCTAD) unless the meaning would otherwise be ambiguous (such as e.g., i.e., c.o.d., and no. [for number]).

Capitalization:

· Be judicious in the capitalization of entire words for emphasis; use them to help make the text clear. Too many can lead to tedious over emphasis and, visually, can distract from the text.

· Capitalize official and legal names and titles, but not subsequent references that are partial, inverted, or colloquial versions of the full form (e.g., Government of Canada, but Canadian government; Prime Minister Jean Chrétien but the prime minister).

· In titles of books or articles, capitalize the first and last words and all nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, and subordinating conjunctions. Do not capitalize articles (a, an, the) unless part of a corporate name (e.g., The Globe and Mail), coordinating conjunctions (and, but, or, nor), subordinating conjunctions (if, as, before, after, when, where), or prepositions (in, at, by, of, off, out, to, up, for, on, under) unless they are the first or last word in a title.

· For hyphenated and compound words, always capitalize the first element in a title. Capitalize the second element if it is a proper noun or proper adjective, if it is as important as the first element, or if it comes at the end of a title (Twentieth-Century Literature, Neo-Conservatism in Theory, Run-of-the-Mill Responses, Medium-Sized Businesses, Non-Tariff).

3. Grammar and Spelling

Towards the end of writing your article you should check for grammatical errors, spelling and punctuation. Regardless of the language in which you submit your article (English or Ukrainian) the paper should be as error free as possible. Articles with an unacceptable amount of errors will not be considered and automatically returned to authors.

Proof-read!

4. Citations, Notes and References

References should be listed at the bottom of the text as endnotes. Number the notes consecutively and ensure that they correspond to those in the text.

· Notes should be used to identify all sources of information referred to in the article and to present explanatory material that is not an integral part of the text.

· Reference to a note is indicated by an arabic superscript (an arabic numeral positioned slightly above the line). The numeral is not bracketed and stands outside all punctuation, except a dash. Most word processing programs have a feature that generates a footnote; it is strongly recommended that you take advantage of this feature to facilitate the process.

· Do not place notes in chapter titles and in headings. Avoid placing them in mid-sentence.

· Cite a work in full at first mention. Subsequent references may appear in abbreviated form.

Articles submitted in Ukrainian should follow the style for references required in Ukraine; articles submitted in English should follow international standards in general and those described in the Chicago Manual of Style specifically (should you have access to this manual). Articles translated into English will be prepared accordingly. As you are already familiar with the Ukrainian style, this manual will concentrate on explaining the international standard for citations and references. In general both styles require the same content, but they differ in presentation and punctuation, so it is important to follow the appropriate style.

In sum, the international standard requires the following information to be included in the footnote:

· first and last name of author(s) followed by a comma;

· title of article — if from a journal — , or title of chapter — if from an edited book —, set out in quotation marks and followed by a comma;

· title of journal, edited book, or book if the book itself is the reference, set in italics and not followed by any punctuation if there are no editors, otherwise insert a comma;

· names of the editors of the edited book and not followed by any punctuation;

· for books, city of publication followed by a colon (:), name of publisher, followed by a comma and year of publication — all set out within parantheses;

· for journals, the volume and issue numbers, separated by a colon (:), as well as the quarterly season of the issue and volume year set out in parantheses;

· the page number(s) where the information being cited can be located (for books, preceded by a comma; for journals, preceded by a colon).

Proper punctuation (use of commas, colons) is vital.

The examples below are again from the Style Guide for Publications for the Centre for Trade Policy and Law in Ottawa.

Examples of notes:

1Gilbert R. Winham, Trading with Canada: The Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (New York: Priority Press Publications, 1988), p. 40.

2Winham, Trading with Canada, p. 59.

3Michael Hart, “The Role of Dispute Settlement in Managing Canada-US Trade and Investment Relations,” in Vanishing Borders: Canada Among Nations 2000, eds. Maureen Appel Molot and Fen Osler Hampson (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 98-99.

4Jim MacNeill, “The Greening of World Politics,” International Journal 45:1 (Winter 1989/90): pp. 1-12.

5Hart, “The Role of Dispute Settlement,” p. 113.

6Canada, Department of the Environment, Towards an International Accord on Climate Change (Ottawa: August 1991), p. 57.

Plagiarism

Proper endnotes and references are extremely important. Failure to acknowledge another writer’s idea, quotes or findings in your article is considered plagiarism. Although it is difficult to arrive at a precise definition of plagiarism, it can be defined simply as the copying by one person of another person’s work, in whole or in significant part without crediting the original source.

Plagiarism can come in a variety of ways. The most blatant form of plagiarism is copying word for word information from another source and not citing the source at all. Another form of plagiarism can occur when the information from the original source is paraphrased (the author uses his/her own words to convey the same information taken from that source) and the original source is not cited. Finally, while it is understood that information that is common knowledge does not need to be cited, if that common knowledge is conveyed using the words of another author, it must be cited.

As academics you are continually engaged with the ideas of others through reading, participating in presentations and conferences, and eventually incorporating them into your writing. As a result, it is very important that you give credit where it is due. Plagiarism is using others’ ideas and words without clearly acknowledging the source of that information.

Please review the example of plagiarism below produced by the Writing Tutorial Services, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana:

How to Recognize Unacceptable and Acceptable Paraphrases

Here’s the ORIGINAL text, from page 1 of Lizzie Borden: A Case Book of Family and Crime in the 1890s by Joyce Williams et al.:

The rise of industry, the growth of cities, and the expansion of the population were the three great developments of late nineteenth century American history. As new, larger, steam-powered factories became a feature of the American landscape in the East, they transformed farm hands into industrial laborers, and provided jobs for a rising tide of immigrants. With industry came urbanization the growth of large cities (like Fall River, Massachusetts, where the Bordens lived) which became the centers of production as well as of commerce and trade.

Here’s an UNACCEPTABLE paraphrase that is plagiarism:

The increase of industry, the growth of cities, and the explosion of the population were three large factors of nineteenth century America. As steam-driven companies became more visible in the eastern part of the country, they changed farm hands into factory workers and provided jobs for the large wave of immigrants. With industry came the growth of large cities like Fall River where the Bordens lived which turned into centers of commerce and trade as well as production.

What makes this passage plagiarism?The preceding passage is considered plagiarism for two reasons:

· the writer has only changed around a few words and phrases, or changed the order of the original’s sentences;

· the writer has failed to cite a source for any of the ideas or facts.

If you do either or both of these things, you are plagiarizing.

NOTE: This plagiarized paragraph is also problematic because it changes the sense of several sentences from the original (for example, “steam-driven companies” in sentence two misses the original’s emphasis on factories).

Here’s an ACCEPTABLE paraphrase of the original:

Fall River, where the Borden family lived, was typical of northeastern industrial cities of the nineteenth century. Steam-powered production had shifted labor from agriculture to manufacturing, and as immigrants arrived in the US, they found work in these new factories. As a result, populations grew, and large urban areas arose. Fall River was one of these manufacturing and commercial centers.1

(at the end of the text, the following endnote would appear:)

1Joyce Williams et al, Lizzie Borden: A Case Book of Family and Crime in the 1890s (Place of publication: Name of publisher, year of publication), p. 1.

Why is this passage acceptable?

This is acceptable paraphrasing because the writer:

· accurately relays the information in the original and uses his/her own words;

· lets the reader know the source of the information.

Here’s an example of a quotation and paraphrase used together, which is also ACCEPTABLE:

Fall River, where the Borden family lived, was typical of northeastern industrial cities of the nineteenth century. As steam-powered production shifted labor from agriculture to manufacturing, the demand for workers “transformed farm hands into factory workers,” and created jobs for immigrants. In turn, growing populations increased the size of urban areas. Fall River was one of these manufacturing hubs that were also “centers of commerce and trade.”1

(at the end of the text, the following endnote would appear:)

1Joyce Williams et al, Lizzie Borden: A Case Book of Family and Crime in the 1890s (Place of publication: Name of publisher, year of publication), p. 1.

Why is this passage acceptable?

This is acceptable paraphrasing because the writer:

· records the information in the original passage accurately;

· gives credit for the ideas in this passage; and

· indicated which part is taken directly from his/her source by putting the passage in quotation marks and citing the page number.

Note that if the writer had used these phrases or sentences in his/her own paper without putting quotation marks around them, she would be PLAGIARIZING. Using another person’s phrases or sentences without putting quotation marks around them is considered plagiarism EVEN IF THE WRITER CITES IN HER OWN TEXT THE SOURCE OF THE PHRASES OR SENTENCES HE/SHE HAS QUOTED.

To avoid plagiarism, you must give credit whenever you:

· use another person’s idea, opinion, or theory;

· use any facts, statistics, graphs, drawings–any pieces of information that are not common knowledge;

· quote another person’s actual spoken or written words; or

· paraphrase of another person’s spoken or written words.

The credit is given by using quotation marks and proper references in the form of footnotes or endnotes.

The section below, gives you some tips on how to avoid accidental plagiarism when you use sources:

· “Cite every piece of information that is not a) the result of your own research, or b) common knowledge. This includes opinions, arguments, and speculations as well as facts, details, figures, and statistics.

· Use quotation marks every time you use the author’s words. (For quotes four lines or longer, indent the whole quotation; this has the same effect as quotation marks which are in these instances unnecessary.)

· At the beginning of the first sentence in which you quote, paraphrase, or summarize, make it clear that what comes next is someone else’s idea:

· According to Smith...

· Jones says...

· In his 1987 study, Robinson proved... ”

· At the end of the quoted or paraphrased sentence or paragraph containing the quoted, paraphrased, or summarized material, insert the superscript arabic number and in the corresponding footnote number provide the complete information on the source, including name of author, title of the book or chapter or journal article, publishing information as appropriate, and page number of the source.

The Internet provides an excellent tool of plagiarism because it is easy to copy material found on the net. To learn more about Internet plagiarism please visit the following website: www.plagiarism.org. In sum, information obtained from internet sources and websites must also be cited. In these instances, cite the document as you would if it was a hard copy (i.e., include the author’s names, title of document/material, year ‘published’) in addition to the website address. The website address on its own does not give the reader of your document enough information as to what that material is all about, especially if the website of an organization or research centre is cited.

PART C: Submitting an article

1. Guidelines

Now we would like to explain to you the submission process. Before you send the article to the editor you must format it according to the journal’s guidelines (although they are common enough, each journal is likely to have its own specific guidelines that must be followed). The formatting guidelines for the Journal of International Economic Policy are as follows:

Submitted articles should be completely double-spaced (including footnotes), applying justified alignment throughout, between 20 and 25 pages long of text (5000 words minimum, excluding footnotes), in 12 Times New Roman, and uniform 2 centimeters / 1 inch margin. Submissions may be in Ukrainian or English (the journal will ensure translation of articles accepted for publication).

In addition, please note the following:

Dashes:- do not use hyphens for either m-dashes or n-dashes

- hyphens should be replaced where appropriate;

- hyphens should only be used for hyphens!!

For example:

“Canada–China” (n-dash, no spaces)

“The scope of this agreement—and indeed every agreement—is

such that…” (m-dash, no spaces)

- i.e.,– always written this way

- e.g.,– always written this way

- % – is always written out in the text as “per cent” but the symbol is used in charts/graphs/tables, etc.

- U.S. should be written as US – and only used as an adjective (e.g., US trade policy); “The United States” is used as a noun

- Periods and commas are INSIDE quotation marks, regardless of whether they were part of the original quotation. All other punctuation (e.g., ? or !) is outside quotation marks unless part of the quotation.

- Vs. (as in a legal case) is always written as v. (and not italic, even though the opponents in the dispute are written in italics, e.g., United Parcel Service of America Inc. v. Canada

- Websites should not be underlined; please remove any hyperlink feature associated with the text

- Dollar values – USD4,000 or US$4,000

– CAD8,000 or CA$8,000

(Please note: no spaces between the currency and the value)

- Turn on the “kerning” and “hyphenation” features on your word processing program; be sure they apply to the entire document, and not just to a paragraph.

2. Submission

Submissions are accepted on an on-going basis for The Journal of International Economic Policy. Authors should include a cover letter confirming that the article has not been previously published or is being considered for publication elsewhere in addition to four hardcopies of the article and a diskette. The cover letter should also indicate author’s/authors’ full name, title and affiliation, address, telephone, fax number and email address. Include a brief (maximum 5 lines) biography of the author(s), including current affiliation, publishing record and research interests. Also include an abstract of between 100 and 150 words, and up to 20 key words describing the content and main theme of the article.

A good abstract is accurate – and contains no new information not cited in the actual paper. It is also self-contained, defining any specialized terminology, abbreviations, or acronyms. It should be concise, specific, and as brief as possible. It should report and not evaluate. Finally, it must be readable. This is often the only part of the article most people will read. It should sell the paper.7

Author’s name should be indicated only in the cover letter.

DO NOT INDICATE THE AUTHOR’S NAME ANYWHERE ON THE SUBMITTED ARTICLE. DO NOT SAVE THE ARTICLE’S ELECTRONIC FILE UNDER THE AUTHOR’S NAME (as all articles undergo anonymous peer-review).

Articles submitted in Ukrainian should be sent to:

Tatyana Tsyhankova

Co-editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Articles submitted in English should be sent to:

Natalie Mychajlyszyn

Co-editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Centre for Trade Policy and Law

Carleton University

1125 Colonel By Drive

Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6

CANADA

3. Post-submission

When the editor receives your article he/she will send you a note acknowledging receipt of the article (see Appendix A). If the article is considered suitable for the journal, the editor will send it to three reviewers for peer review. The reviewers will comment on the article (see Appendix B for the Manuscript Review Form). The reviewers will comment on your paper and they will recommend to the editor whether the paper should be published or not. Ultimately, it is the editor’s decision whether a paper gets published or not, but the editor takes into account the reviewers’ opinions. In most cases the reviewers will ask for some changes to the paper before it is published. When the changes are minor the paper does not have to go through the peer review process another time. But if the requested revisions are major, the paper will have to go through the peer review process again. Please feel free to contact the editor to inquire about the stage at which your article is.

Following the peer-review process and once the editor(s) have made a determination on your paper, you will be informed whether your article will be published or not. In any case, you will receive the reviewers’ comments which will continue to be anonymous. If the article is rejected, you may find the reviewers’ and editor’s comments helpful in terms of how to improve the paper. In this respect, you may:

A) re-write and re-submit the paper again to the Journal of International Economic Policy; and/or

B) try to submit the paper to a different journal.

Every author has experienced the rejection of his/her papers at least once in his/her career. When it happens to you, it should not be taken personally – as difficult as it may be. Instead, it is important to approach the rejection as constructive criticism and an opportunity to learn.

…[W]e all need to develop a healthy attitude towards rejection. Because of the highly competitive atmosphere mentioned earlier, many journals have high rejection rates, as high as 90 and 95 percent for some. Rejection is not necessarily an indication that your work is inferior, and it’s certainly no reason for not trying. Many editors return reviewers reports along with a rejection; these are extremely useful in helping you see how some readers are perceiving your work and what measures can be taken to make it more acceptable for other members of your discourse community. Because these are real readers reading your work specifically to evaluate it, their comments can be quite instructive. While it is true that reviewers like many readers can misinterpret or misunderstand your work, it is likely that their suggestions will be valuable indicators of how other reader will receive your work; thus, you can use these reports to assist in extensive revision before submitting your article to another journal.8

To see examples of acceptance and rejection letters from the editor please see Appendices C to G.

Here is a brief report from a distinguished psychologist who has published a great deal:

The rejection of my own manuscript has a sordid aftermath: (a) one day of depression; (b) one day of utter contempt for the editor and his accomplices; (c) one day of decrying the conspiracy against letting Truth be published; (d) one day of fretful ideas about changing my profession; (e) one day of re-evaluating the manuscript in view of the editor’s comments followed by the conclusion that I was lucky it wasn’t accepted!9

If your paper is accepted for publication you will be requested to assign the copyright to the journal.

II. Reviewers

The peer review process is an anonymous process of evaluating an academic article for publication. The reviewers are asked to give their opinion about the paper and recommendations about whether or not the paper should be published.

The reviewers are contacted by the editor who asks them if they would be interested in reviewing an article submitted for publication. The reviewers do not know who submitted the article; neither does the author know who has reviewed his/her paper. The anonymity of the process ensures objectivity and fairness of the review process; it also protects the reviewer and allows him/her to assess the paper as honestly as possible. At the same time, reviewers should be careful not to turn an article review “into a soapbox for their own favorite ideas, a means of personal revenge, a forum for promoting a personal friend’s publishing efforts, or other unprofessional behaviour.”10 There may certainly be instances when, due to the author’s style of writing, subject matter and the reviewers’ professional awareness, the reviewer will suspect the author of the paper he/she is reviewing. Likewise, based on the reviewer’s comments, the author might suspect who reviewed his/her paper. In these instances, to maintain the integrity of the review process neither should the reviewer in any way let the author know that he/she reviewed his/her paper– even after the process is completed – nor should the author contact the reviewer with his/her suspicions.

When you agree to review an article, the editor will send you the manuscript as well as a Manuscript Review Form to complete and in which is found the criteria by which to assess the article. (See Appendix B for the Manuscript Review Form and Guidelines for The Journal of International Economic Policy.) From this point on, the editor and/or the editorial team will become your point of contact. Again, at no time should you attempt to deduce the name of the author of the manuscript, nor should you attempt to contact the author directly with your suspicions. In essence, reviewing the article follows much the same process and considerations as the author’s preparation of it. More specifically, you will evaluate it according to its substance and style (See in this Manual, previous section for AUTHORS, Part 1: Substance and Part 2: Organization and Style). In the end you will decide whether or not the article merits public exposure by being published.

When reviewers agree to review an article, it is understood that the deadline set by the editor for returning comments will be met. Generally, this deadline is two to three weeks. It is the reviewer’s obligation to inform the editor if the deadline is not convenient and to offer another deadline, or to reject the offer if the review cannot be completed in due course, leaving the editor with time to contact another reviewer and still meet the obligations to the author of a speedy turnaround. The following chart illustrates the peer review process:

Peer Review Flow Chart

The article is submitted to a journal for consideration.

(

Receipt of the article is acknowledged by the editor.

(

The article is read by the editor and deemed suitable/unsuitable for the journal.

(

The editor contacts three to five potential reviewers who have a competence in the topic of the specific article.

(

The article is sent to three reviewers who accepted the request.

(The reviewers submit their comments to the editor within two to three weeks.

(The editor considers the reviewers’ comments and makes a decision on whether or not the journal will publish the article.

(

The editor contacts the author with one of the following decisions:

· Accept the article as is;

· Accept the article following minor revisions by the author;

· The article cannot be published, but can be reconsidered and resubmitted to the journal following major revisions;

· Reject the article, with recommendation that it be submitted to another journal; or,

· Reject the article.

The whole process depends on the cooperation of the reviewers to fulfill their obligations in a timely fashion and any delays in the process are strongly discouraged. Continuous contact with the editor is essential.

* * *

In closing, we hope that studying this manual helps you write and review articles for journals following the anonymous peer-review process. There are many books on the topic of writing and publishing. Some reading suggestions are included in Appendix H.

It is important to keep in mind that becoming a great writer is a long process that requires persistence and practice. In similar fashion, it will take many reviews before you feel comfortable with giving your opinions about somebody’s writing.

We also hope that this manual will stimulate a discussion among Ukrainian scholars writing not only for The Journal of International Economic Policy, but for other international journals as well.

Appendix A: Letter of Acknowledgement

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

This is to acknowledge with thanks receipt of your manuscript. You will be contacted with further information concerning a decision to publish it in the journal. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time should you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix B: Journal of International Economic Policy Manuscript Review Form

Manuscript:(title of manuscript)Reviewer: (name of reviewer - for editorial purposes only)Date Sent: Date Returned:

Part A:

Recommendations

____Accept as is.

____Conditionally accept, pending minor revisions specified in “Comments” section. No need for reviewers to see manuscript again.

____Reject for the moment, but invite resubmission with major revisions specified in “Comments” section.

____Reject, but advise submission to some other journal, such as __________

____Reject outright.

Comments

(Please use another piece of paper if needed to write all your comments)

Part B:

EVALUATION

STRONGLYAGREE

AGREE

UNDECIDED

DISAGREE

STRONGLYDISAGREE

NOTAPPLICABLE

A. Topic is significant to the article’s field of inquiry

B. Literature review is sufficient for this topic

C. Adequate attention is given to theoretical/ conceptual framework

D. Research questions and issues are carefully framed.

E. Adheres to standard of inquiry appropriate for addressing questions raised

F. Conclusions are clearly drawn and supported.

G. Manuscript is well organized and clearly written.

H. Manuscript represents a contribution to knowledge about Topic of the article

Guidelines for Reviewing Articles for Journal of International Economic Policy:

1.Substance:

(a)The argument - what is the main argument or thesis of the article? Is it implicit or explicit? How well is it substantiated? Could the argument stand as it is, or does it have gaps?

(b)Originality - is the article’s argument based upon new facts or new ideas? Or perhaps, both? How well are these articulated and integrated?

(c)Documentation - are the references sufficient, given the parameters the author has set? Does the author cite works that are not directly relevant to his/her argument?

(d)General comments - was the article interesting to you, even if it may not be within your particular area of expertise/interest? If not, why? To whom do you think the article will appeal - specialists or non-specialists? Does it sufficiently appeal to either of these groups?

2.Style/Presentation:

(a)Structure - is it clear what the stages of the author’s arguments are, i.e., where the article ‘is going’? Is it easy to read, i.e., free of unnecessary jargon? Or, does it ramble along? What suggestions about improving clarity do you have, if any?

(b)Editing - does the style distract the reader from the substantive merits of the article? If so, do you think it is worthwhile to edit the article, or do you think the article does not have enough strengths to warrant the effort?

3.Recommendations:

If you had to make a decision about what to do with the article - solely based upon your reading - which of the following would you recommend:

(a)Accept the article for publication, with no conditions attached.

(b)Accept the article for publication, on condition of minor changes, such as re-writing the introduction, adding footnotes, some qualifications to be made about specific points.

(c)Revise and re-submit. The article should be sent back to the author for it to be re-worked more thoroughly. The article has potential, but needs to be significantly revised. Areas of improvement should be indicated and recommended. Publication is not guaranteed, however, once revisions are made and the paper is resubmitted.

(d)Reject the article as unsuitable for this journal, but recommend it for submission to another journal.

(e)Reject the article outright.

Appendix C: Letter of Acceptance

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

Thank you for your submission entitled “Good Writing in Good Spirit”.

We are pleased to inform you that your article has been accepted for publication in The Journal of Good Writing and will appear in issue no. X. Please provide us with an electronic copy of your paper if you have not already done so. You will receive two copies of the journal as soon as it becomes available.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix D: Letter of Acceptance, with Minor Revisions Required

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

Thank you for your submission entitled “Good Writing in Good Spirit”.

We are pleased to inform you that your article has been accepted for publication in The Journal of Good Writing. Please note the comments made by the reviewers concerning some minor revisions that you are requested to carry out first. So that we may stay on schedule, it would be greatly appreciated if you can send the revised paper within two weeks in electronic form. The paper will not undergo the peer-review process again.

We will be in touch to inform you of the issue number in which your article will appear. You will receive two copies of the journal as soon as it becomes available.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix E: Letter of “Revise and Resubmit”

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

We have reviewed your paper entitled “Good Writing in Good Spirit”. Based on the comments of reviewers, we have decided not to publish the article at this time. A synopsis of those comments is attached for your information. We invite you to revise your paper and re-submit it for reconsideration. Please note that with re-submission there is no guarantee that the paper will be published as it will undergo the peer-review process again. Thank you for your interest in The Journal of Good Writing.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix F: Letter of Rejection, With Recommendation to Another Journal

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

We have reviewed your paper entitled “Good Writing in Good Spirit”. Based on the comments of reviewers, we have decided not to publish the article at this time. A synopsis of those comments is attached for your information. In addition, we invite you to consider submitting your paper to Journal Y as it may be more appropriate.

Thank you for your interest in The Journal of Good Writing.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix G: Letter of Rejection

October 2, 2003

The author30 Southpark Dr.Ottawa, Ontario

K1B 3B8

Dear Mr. Author,

We have reviewed your paper entitled “Good Writing in Good Spirit”. Based on the comments of reviewers, we have decided not to publish the article. A synopsis of those comments is attached for your information.

Thank you for your interest in The Journal of Good Writing.

Sincerely,

Editor

Journal of International Economic Policy

Kyiv National Economic University

54/1, prospekt Peremohy

Room 402

Kyiv 03057

UKRAINE

Appendix H: Bibliography

Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers. Various editions. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Publishing

Allison, A. and T. Frongia, eds. The Graduate Student’s Guide to Getting Published. New York: Prentice Hall, 1992.

Daft, R. “Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it.” In Publishing in the Organizational Sciences, edited by L. Cummings and P. Frost, pp. 193-210. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1985.

Girden, E. R. Evaluating Research Articles From Start To Finish. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1996.

Matkin, R. E. and T. F. Riggar. Persist and Publish: Helpful Hints for Academic Writing and Publishing. Niwot: University Press of Colorado, 1991.

Morton, H. C., ed. Writings on Scholarly Communication: An Annotated Bibliography of Books and Articles on Publishing, Libraries, Scholarly Research, and Related Issues. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1988.

Moxley, J. M. Publish, Don't Perish: The Scholar’s Guide to Academic Writing and Publishing. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992.

Peek, R. P. and G. B. Newby, eds. Scholarly Publishing: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.

Powell, W. W. Getting into Print: The Decision-making Process in Scholarly Publishing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

Writing

Boice, R. Professors as Writers. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press, 1990.

MacDonald, S. Professional Academic Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1994.

Strunk, W., Jr. and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1979.

Woodward, J. A. Writing Research Papers: Investigating Resources in Cyberspace. Lincolnwood, FL: NTC/Contemporary Publishing Group, 1997.

Zinsser, W. On Writing Well. 4th ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1990.

� Donald Fiske, “Planning and Revising Research Reports,” in Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors, ed. Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publisher, Inc., 1997), p. 71.

� Fiske, “Planning and Revising Research Reports,” p. 59.

� Judith Richlin-Klonsky and Ellen Strenski, A Guide to Writing Sociology Papers (New York: St. Martin’s Press, Inc. 1991), p. 20.

� Morton Freedgood, “Curious Cases of Plagiarism,” in Writing, Revising and Editing, ed. Gordon Carroll (Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1969), p. 29.

� “Plagiarism: What it is and How to Recognize it and Avoid it,” Writing Tutorial Services, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, www.indiana.edu/~wts/wts/plagiarism.html.

� “Avoiding Plagiarism,” The Writing Place, Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, October 2003, www.writing.nwu.edu/avoiding_plagiarism.html.

7 Jeffrey A. Cantor, A Guide to Academic Writing (Westport, CN: Praeger Publishers, 1993), p. 49.

8 Gary Olsen, “Publishing Scholarship in Humanistic Disciplines: Joining the Conversation,” in Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors, ed. Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publisher, Inc., 1997), p. 65.

9 B. J. Underwood, Psychological Research (New York: Appleton Century-Crofts, 1957), p. 87, cited in Fiske, “Planning and Revising Research Reports,” p. 81.

10 Robin W. Erwin, “Reviewing Books for Scholarly Journals,” in Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors, ed. Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publisher, Inc., 1997), p. 85.

PAGE

3