Reviewer and Guidelines
Responsibility of Peer Reviewers
Peer reviewers are responsible for critically evaluating manuscripts in their field of expertise, providing constructive advice and honest feedback to authors. Reviewers should discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, suggest ways to enhance the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance, clarity, and originality of the manuscript.
Before Reviewing, Please Consider the Following:
-
Expertise Match
Ensure the article topic aligns with your field of expertise. If the manuscript falls outside your area, please inform the editor promptly and, if possible, recommend an alternative reviewer. -
Time Commitment
The review process should ideally be completed within two weeks. If you agree but need a longer time, please notify the editor promptly or suggest an alternative reviewer who can meet the timeline. -
Potential Conflicts of Interest
Disclose any conflicts of interest before reviewing. These do not automatically disqualify you as a reviewer, but transparency is essential. If you have questions about potential conflicts, please reach out to the editorial office.
Review Process Guidelines
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Do not share or discuss the content with anyone outside the review process.
- Constructive Feedback: Provide clear, specific, and actionable feedback that helps authors improve their work. Use respectful language even when pointing out significant issues.
- Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers should assess the article's originality, relevance to the field, methodology, clarity, and quality of the data and interpretation. If the article is not publishable in its current form, suggest ways for improvement.
Thank you for your commitment to maintaining high scholarly standards and advancing research quality.
