Recent Issues

Volume 17
Issue 2, 183–362
Issue 1, 1–182

Volume 16, 5 issues

Volume 15, 5 issues

Volume 14, 5 issues

Volume 13, 5 issues

Volume 12, 8 issues

Volume 11, 5 issues

Volume 10, 5 issues

Volume 9, 5 issues

Volume 8, 5 issues

Volume 7, 6 issues

Volume 6, 4 issues

Volume 5, 4 issues

Volume 4, 4 issues

Volume 3, 4 issues

Volume 2, 5 issues

Volume 1, 2 issues

The Journal
About the journal
Ethics and policies
Peer-review process
Submission guidelines
Submission form
Editorial board
Editors' interests
ISSN (electronic): 1944-4184
ISSN (print): 1944-4176
Author index
To appear
Other MSP journals

Overview of the peer-review process

This journal operates a single-anonymized review process (the names of the reviewers are hidden from the author). All contributions will be initially assessed by an editor for suitability for the journal. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of one independent expert reviewer to assess the scientific quality of the paper. The editors are responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles. The editors' decisions are final. Editors are not involved in decisions about papers which they have written themselves. Details of the peer-review process follow.

Responsibilities of reviewers


Judgments should be objective and well considered. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with any participant.


Reviewers must retain confidentiality with respect to the reviewed article. Reviewers' identities are not disclosed to authors or third parties.


Reviewers should be alert for additional resources or information that could be brought to the author's attention for improvement of the article.

Responsibilities of the journal and its editors

The governance structure of Involve and its acceptance procedures are transparent and designed to ensure the highest quality of published material. Business concerns are not allowed to compromise intellectual and ethical standards. The Managing Editor makes the final decision on a submitted manuscript after the manuscript has been proposed for publication by an Editor (member of the Editorial Board). The proposing Editor must explicitly endorse the paper's scientific content. Specifically:

1. Upon submission, an author suggests a member of the Editorial Board to be the article's handling editor.

2. The handling editor enlists the cooperation of two experts to act as reviewers. If and when the handling editor decides for the publication of the manuscript, he or she sends the Managing Editor a proposal to that effect, together with the reviews and other information in support of the proposal.

3. When the handling editor chosen by the author is unable or unwilling to handle the paper, or when a conflict of interest might be present, another handling editor will take on the task.

4. The handling editor will strive to have the paper evaluated fairly. Failure to find willing reviewers after several attempts is sufficient grounds for rejection.

5. The handling editor makes a recommendation to the Managing Editor.

6. The final decision rests with the Managing Editor.