The Alexandria Journal of Accounting Research is dedicated to making the process of publishing research papers smoother and more flexible for researchers. One of its goals is to foster new concepts and trends in scientific publishing, which naturally includes all processes and stages, especially the peer review process. The journal employs a rigorous, standardized peer review conducted by expert reviewers following international academic publishing standards.

The Alexandria Journal of Accounting Research views the publishing process as a holistic endeavor, rather than separate stages, intending to build a strong academic community. This community comprises elite scholars and a comprehensive, classified research database spanning multiple fields. The journal guarantees that a research paper submitted for publication will undergo a systematic review by expert peer reviewers before being published in an internationally classified research database.

The Alexandria Journal of Accounting Research employs a double-blind peer review process. This means that the identities of both the reviewers and the author(s) are concealed from one another during the review of the research paper, should the journal choose the peer reviewers.

Each research submission is assigned to two or more peer reviewers, who provide a thorough, fair, and thoughtful evaluation of the material to ensure that all published work aligns with the journal's goals.

Priority is given to research papers that represent significant and groundbreaking advances in accounting. Research papers should:

• Focus on areas that have not been previously explored in accounting.
• Use new theories, methodologies, or innovative scientific techniques.
• Contribute to or build on existing theories or previous research.

Peer reviewers evaluate research papers based on the following criteria:

• Significance: Does the material represent a new and important advance in scientific research?
• Literature Review: Does the paper provide a well-organized and analytical review of relevant literature? Does it use a clear and well-developed theoretical or conceptual framework?
• Research Design: Does the paper reflect an appropriate design and methodology? Does it provide high-quality data and analysis?
• Discussion: Do the discussion and conclusions highlight the importance of the results for research, policy, and practice?

Decision Making
Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editors will make one of the following decisions:

• Reject: The paper is unsuitable for publication in the journal.
• Resubmit for Review (Major Revisions): The paper can be published, but major revisions are required before reconsideration.
• Minor Revisions Required: The paper is publishable, but specific revisions must be made before final consideration.
• Accept: The paper can proceed to the next stage of the editorial process without further modifications.

The most common initial decisions for research papers are either rejection with resubmission (major revisions) or requests for minor revisions. The journal aims to provide initial decisions within one week of receiving a new research paper. However, the peer review process can vary in duration, depending on circumstances, but typically it does not exceed four weeks.

Publication
Accepted research papers will be published in the Online First format immediately following the editorial decision.

• Online First: This means that peer-reviewed research papers are made available to readers before print publication, allowing early access to the content, even before the final PDF version of the paper is published.