Reviewer The reviewer is an eminent person with subject expertise and plays an essential role in the peer review process ensuring the integrity of all the published material. The whole process depends on the trust and involvement of the participating reviewers. The efforts of reviewers are the key to the objectives of a fair and timely review process for all of our manuscripts and publication of only the highest quality papers. All the participating peer reviewers should adhere considerate and ethical responsibility. Their constructive comments and reports will helps the editor to take a decision on the manuscript. We greatly appreciate reviewers for their help in meeting these important objectives.
Peer Review is a collaborative process that allows manuscripts submitted to a journal to be evaluated and commented upon by independent experts within the same field of research. The evaluation and critique generated from peer review provides authors with feedback to improve their work and, critically, allows the editor to assess the manuscript’s suitability for publication in the journal.
The peer review process does receive criticism and is not without its limitations; however, it still plays a fundamental role in helping to ensure published research is accurate, trustworthy, and meets the highest standards of research within a given field.
By acting as a reviewer you can:
- Help authors improve their papers by providing your professional expertise. Gain a sense of prestige in being consulted as an expert.
- Play an important role in maintaining a good, rigorous peer-review process.
- Expand your awareness of the current research emerging within your field.
- Build relationships and improve your academic and professional profile. Although often anonymous, the review process can enable a discussion (between author, reviewer, and editor) around a research field or topic.
- Improve your own writing skills. Reviewing others work can make it easier to spot commons errors in your own.
- Reviewers should respect the confidentiality and do not disclose the information until the manuscript is published.
- Reviewers should protect individual data. They should not use the information for their own benefit or share with any other individual or organization.
- Reviewers should agree to review the manuscript only if they have expertise in the subject area adequate for accurate assessment and give a constructive report.
- Ensure that all authors have equal opportunity to publish and their origin, nationality, ethnicity, race, religion, gender or political beliefs do not influence the peer review process.
- Reviews should be based on relevancy, integrity, scientific strength, potential interest, completeness, clarity and ethics in the manuscript.
- Reviewers should declare any potential conflict of interests and take assistance from the Editor regarding any uncertain conflicts.
- Reviewers should declare if they are involved in the submitted work in any manner and decline to review the manuscript.
- Reviewers should notify the editor if the manuscript has been already reviewed by them for any other journal and seek guidance whether to carry further or not.
- Reviewers should notify the editor immediately if they found any partial or whole information in the manuscript is plagiarized or infringed.
- Reviewers should notify the Editor if they have any concerns in the study, ethical aspects or misconduct in the manuscript.
- Reviewers should not attempt to contact the authors regarding the manuscript without the permission from the editor.
Make a recommendation
Once you’ve read the paper and have assessed its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the editor regarding publication. The specific decision types used by a journal will vary but the key decisions are:
Accept – if the paper is suitable for publication in its current form.
Minor revision – if the paper will be ready for publication after light revisions. Please list the revisions you would recommend the author makes.
Major revision – if the paper would benefit from substantial changes such as expanded data analysis, widening of the literature review, or rewriting sections of the text.
Reject – if the paper is not suitable for publication with this journal or if the revisions that would need to be undertaken are too fundamental for the submission to continue being considered in its current form.
What do reviewers do and why?
Reviewers evaluate article submissions to journals, based on the requirements of that journal, predefined criteria, and quality, completeness and accuracy of the research presented. They provide feedback on the article and the research, suggest improvements and make a recommendation to the editor about whether to accept, reject or request changes to the article.
Reviewing is a time-intensive process – writing a review report can be almost as much work as writing a manuscript! – But it is very worthwhile for the reviewer as well as for the community. Reviewers:
- Ensure the rigorous standards of the scientific process by taking part in the peer-review system.
- Uphold the integrity of the journal by identifying invalid research, and helping to maintain the quality of the journal.
- Fulfill a sense of obligation to the community and their own area of research.
- Establish relationships with reputable colleagues and their affiliated journals, and increase their opportunities to join an Editorial Board.
- Reciprocate professional courtesy, as authors and reviewers are often interchangeable roles – as reviewer, researchers ‘repay’ the same courtesy they receive as authors.
Benefits for Reviewer
There are great benefits to becoming a reviewer. You can:
- Establish your expertise in the field and expand your knowledge.
- Improve your reputation and increase your exposure to key figures in the field.
- Stay up to date with the latest literature, and have advanced access to research results.
- Develop critical thinking skills essential to research.
- Advance in your career – peer review is an essential role for researchers.
- After reviewing 5-6 manuscript, you can submit your 1 manuscript without any publication charges.
- Certificate will be issue to every reviewer with hardcopy of Journal
- Reviewer Name will appear in hard copy of journal.
- Best reviewer award with memento every year.
Timing for Review
Blind peer review
Editor medicate all interaction between reviewers and authors
Without review are not published
Review facilitated by the journal
- Please acknowledge promptly whether you can serve as a Reviewer or not.
- Decline if you have no subject expertise to carry the review process wholly.
- Reviewer should review 7-8 articles in an year.
- Reviewers are given 0-10, 11-20 or 21-30 days to submit their review reports.
- Ensure proficient peer review process and submit reviews within the time-frame. Please inform the editor if you cannot do so.
- Please do not delay the review process intentionally.
- Editor will take a decision on the manuscript even if at least two reviews were received within the time-frame regardless the third Reviewer's report.
- Contact the Editor for any additional documents in support to the manuscript.
- Please do not edit any information from the manuscript content.
- Please be confident and provide sound, constructive and unbiased reviews.
- Please remember to acknowledge the good information in the manuscript.
- Reviews should be objective and should not comprise any personal accusations.
- Reviewers should clearly indicate if any confidential comments directed only to the Editor.
- Avoid using unfair language or offensive criticism which is inappropriate for professional communication.
- Please keep a copy of the review documents for your use in case a revision is submitted by the authors.
- Please respond promptly with required information whenever the Editor contact you post review process regarding the reviewed manuscript.
- Please be aware of the Journal's policies and guidelines.