The reviewers are the esteemed contributors to the peer review processplay a vital role in maintaining the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing. As a reviewer, your expertise and insights are instrumental in evaluating the validity, significance, and rigor of research manuscripts submitted to our journal. These guidelines are designed to provide clarity and guidance on conducting thorough and constructive peer reviews while upholding the highest standards of professionalism and ethics.
• Commit to conducting reviews in a timely manner, recognizing the importance of prompt feedback in the scholarly publishing process.
• Approach each review with impartiality and objectivity, focusing on the quality of the research and adherence to scholarly standards rather than personal biases.
• Familiarize yourself with the journal's scope, aims, and editorial policies before accepting a review assignment.
• Evaluate the manuscript critically, considering its originality, methodology, significance, and contribution to the field of study.
• Provide detailed and constructive feedback to authors, highlighting strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript.
• Offer specific suggestions for improvement, supporting your recommendations with evidence from the manuscript and relevant literature.
• Please do not share any of the aspects of the manuscripts with any one or do not give to any third person for review without informing to the editorial office. Please ensure that you will handle the manuscript confidentiality with utmost priority.
• Do not use any of the content you read in the manuscript until Publication. Post publication you may use the content provided proper reference is cited.Maintain confidentiality and anonymity throughout the review process, refraining from disclosing information about the manuscript or the review process to unauthorized individuals.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest that may compromise your impartiality or objectivity as a reviewer.
• Communicate with editors promptly and professionally, notifying them of any delays or concerns that may arise during the review process.
• Avoid personal attacks or derogatory language in your reviews, maintaining a respectful and constructive tone at all times.
• Reflect on your reviewing experiences and seek opportunities for professional development and growth.
• Stay informed about emerging trends and best practices in your field of expertise, incorporating new insights into your review process.
• Please ensure that you will follow the mentioned checklist while reviewing the manuscript.
• Read the complete manuscript and list the strengths and the drawback concerns. Do an unbiased review.
• Add proper reasons and any suggestions if you have to support your listed strengths and drawbacks. Provide your reviews, objectively, constructively and your suggestions to improve the manuscripts.
• There exists a chance of author not understanding your way of writing the comments. Thus make your reviews short and simple to follow. Provide a thorough review focusing the major key points of scientific writing such as, content, originality, writing, plagiarized content, liability, scientific validity, presentation and language.
• Respond to the editorial office immediately, if they revert back for any possible queries on the review aspects.
• Avoid writing unwanted or unrelated reviews that may divert the topic of manuscript.
• Please ensure to contact editorial office if you find any missing documents with reference to the manuscript. The editorial office will send you the necessary documents at the earliest possible.
• Please understand it is the author's manuscript and do not write reviews that will completely change the author's writing. Please provide closely related comments.
• All the reviews provided must be neutral and should not affect the sensitivity of the language issues that may insult authors. Do not use any rude language while writing reviews. Editorial office strictly opposes any such comments.
• Any comments that are specific to editor may be provided with a key note *confidential so that they are omitted from the reviews sent to the author's for review revision.
• Do not suggest the authors to include the citations to the reviewer's in order to increase the citations or any academic reasons. It is against the ethics of peer review processing.
• Reviewers must understand that the final decision of the manuscript publication or rejection will stay with the Editor despite of their recommendations. However, the recommendations and the revisions will be closely scrutinized by the Editor before acceptance.
• Stay informed about emerging trends and best practices in your field of expertise, incorporating new insights into your review process.
In conclusion, your contributions as a reviewer are invaluable to the advancement of scholarly knowledge and the dissemination of high-quality research within our journal's community. By adhering to these guidelines and embodying the principles of professionalism, integrity, and excellence, you play a pivotal role in upholding the standards of academic publishing and fostering a culture of rigorous peer review.
For further inquiries or to volunteer as a reviewer, please contact [editorialoffice@scholars.direct].
Sign up and be the first to get newly published papers to your email!
