top of page
Abstract Record

Journal of 
World economy: Transformations & transitions
ISSN 2792-3851

guide for reviewers

We value our peers,

we appreciate our authors. 


At ERUDITUS®, we aim to be closer to both researchers and peers. We understand the importance of time for our authors, and we do our best to minimize the duration of the peer-review process without affecting the quality of the paper or its academic value. We also value the time our peers dedicate to providing papers with the appropriate reviews as quickly as possible.

Benefits for Reviewers

Our business model is based on an equilibrium between two sides of the scholar community, i.e., Authors and Reviewers. 

We collaborate with highly qualified reviewers on a freelance basis, which guarantees a per-paper payment to our peers and fast reviews for our authors.   

Additionally, we provide our active reviewers with one free publication voucher per year and a reviewer certificate.

To join us, please fill out the Application


Reviewers willing to join our reviewer team must have at least two research papers indexed in Scopus or Web of Science within the applied research area within the last five years, and have a profile with ResearchGate or a public page (personal/institutional), as well as ORCID.



There is no doubt that peer-review is the essential element in academic publications and that reviewers play a significant role in evaluating the quality of manuscripts.  

Reviewers collaborating with ERUDITUS® are to be fully committed to good publication practices, following these principles:

  1. To treat manuscripts confidentially;

  2. To accept or decline invitations quickly;

  3. To be objective in their judgments, with no personal criticism of the author;

  4. To accept papers for review only if they have sufficient expertise in that field;

  5. Not to accept an invitation if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other kinds of relationships;

  6. To review manuscripts in a timely manner and to request an extension if necessary;

  7. To point out relevant published work which has not yet been cited;

  8. To respect defined deadlines;

  9. To evaluate manuscripts based on the paper's originality, significance, scientific contribution, clarity, accuracy, quality of presentation, English level, and overall merit;

  10. To justify their decisions with sufficient arguments;

  11. To underline any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge;

  12. To inform if anyone else, such as a student, will participate in writing the review;

  13. To take the responsibility of other participants, and to ensure they abide by these principles.


Evaluation Report

Reviewers are required to sign up in the manuscript submission page as reviewer, where they can collaborate with the editorial team and send questions to authors. 


The evaluation report shall be filled out within the submission system. 

Anchor 1
bottom of page