Submissions and Editorial Policies

If you intend to write, or are in the process of writing, a paper that fits within the format and scope of the RCF, we will be pleased to hear from you. We likewise welcome special issue proposals.  You are welcome but not obliged, in the first instance, to send an extended abstract for initial review to the Editors (prior to January 2021) and/or the Editor-in-Chief  (after January 2021) or publisher to ascertain fit with the journal. The full draft paper will be subject to a reviewing process to ensure quality standards and balance before being finally accepted.

When you are ready to submit the final manuscript, manuscripts should be submitted to Manuscript Manager https://rcf.manuscriptmanager.net/. There is no submission fee.  

In your cover letter, you may indicate conflicts of interest (either positive or negative) with potential reviewers.  Also, you may nominate reviewers (but we are not obliged to use those reviewers).

If you have previously submitted a paper to another journal and had your submission rejected, you are welcome but not obliged to submit your referee reports from the prior submission along with a detailed letter explaining how you handled all the comments from the prior submission.  Doing so may expedite the reviewing process at RCF.

Accepted manuscripts will be copyedited and proofread, so it is not necessary to prepare camera-ready copy.

Abstract

Please provide an abstract of not more than 150 words. The abstract will appear in various online and printed abstract journals.

Citations and References

An alphabetical list of references must be provided at the end of the paper. During production, we will use these references to create links to the cited articles that are available on the Internet.

Citations should conform to the Chicago Manual of Style Author-Date style as follows:

Leeson, Peter T. 2014. "Human Sacrifice," Review of Behavioral Economics 1, no. 1-2: 137-165. doi: 10.1561/105.00000007. (journal)

Haurie, Alain, Jacek B. Krawczyk, and Georges Zaccour. 2012. Games and Dynamic Games. Singapore: now/World Scientific. (book)

Chaudhary, Sunil, Michelle Green, Ramin Mahmoudi, and Vicki Ting. 2007. "The Impact of New Information Technology on the US Mortgage Industry" In The Business and Information Technologies (BIT) Project, edited by Uday Karmarkar and Vandana Mangal, 251-287. Singapore: World Scientific. (chapter in an edited volume)

Figures and Tables

Submitted papers should include figures and tables at the end of the paper.  Figures and tables need to be “stand alone” with a descriptive header that enables readers to understand completely what is going on in the table or figure without having to refer back to the text.

After a manuscript is accepted for publication, graphics for the final version must be submitted as separate files. When supplying color figures or halftones (photos), ensure that there is sufficient contrast to enable clear black and white printing. Use either Times New Roman or Arial typefaces on all figures. Do not put boxes around figures. Halftones should be supplied in 300 dpi resolution.

Papers submitted to RCF will be first sent to the Editor-in-Chief  as the Handling Editor  The Editor-in-Chief may elect to pick reviewers directly, or assign the paper to an Editor.   The Handling Editor may elect to pick reviewers directly.  The Handling Editor may delegate reviewer selection to an Associate Editor, who in turn sends their recommendation to the Handling Editor to process the decision.  Normally two reviewers are invited to review each paper; however, decisions may be processed with no reviews (desk reject) or one review.  In the event of extreme differences between two reviewer opinions, a third reviewer may be asked to opine on the paper.  Reviewers are asked to provide a report within one month of agreeing to review.  Decisions on most papers are made within 6-12 weeks of the initial submission.

Conflicts of interest in the handling process among editors and reviewers are avoided where possible.  Conflicts include but are not limited to co-authorship, working at the same institution, and other forms of direct collaboration that may bias (positively or negatively) the academic review process.

RCF requires authors to make their code available on request, including both before and after a paper is accepted for publication. Empirical studies can use primary or secondary data. Many sources of data in corporate finance are not publicly available, or at least not publicly available for free. Hence, RCF only requires data to be submitted with an empirical paper if those data are publicly available for free; otherwise, data do not need to be submitted (just the source code would be submitted in that case). However, methods need to be described in full with sufficient detail to enable other scholars to replicate the work.

Authors may formally contest an editorial decision as follows. (1) The author submits a new paper on the online system, with an accompanying letter explaining the rationale for the appeal in reference to the prior submission.  (2) The Editors (Managing Editor and Associate Editors) are each informed about the appeal, and if the appeal is about the handling editor then another Editor handles the appeal. (3) A new reviewer is used to review the editorial decision and prior reviewer reports.  The new handling Editor bases the decision on the new reviewer’s recommendation and may or may not change the decision to ‘revise and resubmit’; any of the prior reviewers may or may not be used in subsequent rounds.  (4) If the decision is to continue to reject, then the decision is final and there is no basis for further appeal. (5) Any coauthor on a paper may appeal only once in 3-year period. (6) All coauthors must agree to go ahead with an appeal.