Reviewer Responsibilities
- Reviewers are expected to deliver prompt and qualified evaluations of the scholarly quality. The reviewer must take care of the real contribution and originality of the manuscript. Please note that the review must be fully objective. They are required to provide clear judgments along with logical arguments.
- In the assessment, reviewers have to evaluate whether the manuscript aligns with the profile of the journal. This assessment is done with consideration of the relevance of the topic and methodology, the scientific significance, the clarity of the work, and the scholarly apparatus. Every review has a standard format.
- Reviewers are obligated to avoid any conflicts of interest with the author or funding authority of the research. In case such conflict arises, they are required to convey the matter immediately to the Editor in Chief. Moreover, reviewers should not accept manuscripts for review that go beyond their area of expertise.
- Reviewers have the responsibility of notifying the Editor in Chief about any suspicions of potential violations of ethical standards by the research author.
- Reviewers must inspect if the author added a published work without referencing the actual author. While they can suggest specific citations, they cannot demand the usage of their own or papers published in the journal. They can only practice it if they have a valid justification.
- It is the reviewers' responsibility to enhance the quality of the manuscript through critiques and potential recommendations. They can provide feedback and suggest revisions before the publication. They must outline how the suggested adjustments can be implemented.
- All the manuscripts that are under review are considered confidential material. Hence, reviewers are prohibited from using any unpublished content from the given manuscript. In case you’re doing so, explicitly written consent from the author is required.
