For Reviewers
As gatekeepers of scientific integrity, reviewers play a pivotal role in upholding the quality and rigor of scholarly publishing. Your expertise shapes the advancement of research, making impartial and constructive feedback essential to the peer review ecosystem. Before accepting a review invitation, please confirm your ability to assess the manuscript objectively, declare any conflicts of interest (e.g., recent collaborations, institutional ties, or competitive research), and ensure familiarity with the journal’s scope, aims, and ethical guidelines.
Eligibility & Onboarding
To join our reviewer pool, submit your CV highlighting expertise, recent publications, and research interests to the journal office. Ideal candidates hold a PhD or equivalent, demonstrate active research in the field, and have a track record of peer-reviewed publications. Upon approval, you’ll receive access to our submission system and guidelines. Reviewers may request certificates of contribution and are eligible for annual recognition, including discounted article processing charges (APCs) for their own submissions and public acknowledgment in our "Reviewers of the Year" feature.
Review Process
All manuscripts undergo double-anonymous review. Reviewers must adhere to a 3-week turnaround time, with extensions available by request. Your evaluation should address: alignment with journal scope, methodological soundness, originality of findings, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical standards (e.g., proper citation, data transparency, and absence of plagiarism). If misconduct is suspected (e.g., image manipulation, duplicate publication), report concerns directly to the Editor-in-Chief for investigation under COPE guidelines.
Review Guidelines
Structure your feedback to balance criticism with specificity:
- Major Comments: Evaluate research design, data analysis, and conclusions; suggest revisions that strengthen scientific validity.
- Minor Comments: Address clarity, organization, and technical details (e.g., grammar, figures, citations).
- Recommendation: Choose from: Accept as Is, Minor Revision (editorial review only), Major Revision (re-review required), or Reject. Justify decisions with evidence to assist editorial deliberation.
Ethics & Confidentiality
Manuscripts and review materials are confidential; sharing content or discussing submissions with third parties is prohibited. Reviewers with conflicts of interest must recuse themselves, with the option to nominate reviewers (excluding those listed by authors for exclusion).
Your commitment to excellence ensures the integrity of published research. We trust reviewers to uphold the highest ethical standards, and we welcome feedback on improving our review processes. Together, we advance science through rigorous, fair, and collaborative peer review.
