Review Guidelines
Peer reviewers are expected to provide constructive, critical, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers must have relevant expertise and allocate sufficient time to perform a thorough review. The following responsibilities apply:
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Field Relevance
Ensure that the manuscript assigned for review falls within your area of expertise. If it does not, please inform the editorial team promptly. - Timely Review
Submit your review within the designated timeframe provided by the editorial board. If you require an extension, please communicate with the editor in advance. - Conflict of Interest
Avoid reviewing any manuscript in which you have a potential conflict of interest—financial, institutional, personal, or professional. If such a conflict exists, inform the Editor-in-Chief and recommend an alternative reviewer if possible. - Impartial Evaluation
Assess manuscripts objectively, without being influenced by the authors’ religion, race, ethnicity, gender, nationality, or political views. - Critical and Logical Feedback
Reviews should be based on academic merit. Provide constructive comments and clear justifications for your recommendation (accept, revise, or reject). - Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Do not share or discuss the content with anyone outside the editorial process. - Respect for Intellectual Property
Reviewers must respect the authors’ intellectual property and refrain from using any part of the data, analysis, or interpretations in the manuscript for personal benefit.