guidelines reviewer

Guidelines for Journal Reviewers
This guideline aims to provide clear instructions for reviewers to conduct professional, fair, and transparent evaluations of submitted manuscripts, thereby ensuring the quality and integrity of the journal.

Reviewer Qualifications

  1. Reviewers must have relevant expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript under review.
  2. They should possess experience in conducting research in related fields.
  3. Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed to the Editor.

Ethics and Confidentiality

  1. All information contained in the manuscript must be treated as confidential.
  2. Reviewers must not use the information for personal gain.
  3. Reviewers should remain neutral and avoid any biases.

Review Process

Manuscript Eligibility:

  1. Does the manuscript fit within the scope of the journal?
  2. Does it offer new or significant contributions to the field?

Manuscript Structure:

  1. Title: Is the title appropriate and representative of the manuscript’s content?
  2. Abstract: Does the abstract clearly summarize the objectives, methods, results, and conclusions?
  3. Introduction: Is the background and purpose of the research adequately explained?
  4. Methods: Are the methods described in detail and reproducible?
  5. Results and Discussion: Are the results clearly presented and supported by data?
  6. Conclusion: Are the conclusions justified by the findings?

Quality of Writing:

  1. Is the manuscript well-written and adheres to scientific language standards?
  2. Check for grammar, spelling, and clarity of communication.

References:

  1. Are the references relevant, up-to-date, and complete?
  2. Verify that all in-text citations are appropriately listed in the bibliography.

Reviewer Recommendations

After reviewing, the reviewer may provide one of the following recommendations to the Editor:

  1. Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without revision.
  2. Accept with Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor improvements before publication.
  3. Major Revisions: The manuscript requires substantial changes and should be re-evaluated after revision.
  4. Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to quality or relevance issues.

Review System Usage

  1. Provide constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscript.
  2. Avoid comments that are offensive or irrelevant.

Deadlines

Reviewers are expected to complete their review within the timeframe set by the Editor. If unable to meet the deadline, they must promptly inform the Editor.

This guideline aims to assist reviewers in contributing effectively to the journal’s quality and integrity. For further inquiries, please contact the Editor.