For Users
- All users are advised to use Mozilla Firefox or Private/Incognito Browsing Mode.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Responsibilities of Reviewers
The Responsibilities of Reviewers outlines the principles and responsibilities that guide the peer-review process, ensuring professionalism, integrity, and confidentiality. It emphasizes the importance of reciprocity, encouraging contributors to support the journal by participating in the review process. Reviewers are expected to provide objective and thorough assessments of manuscripts while maintaining confidentiality and avoiding any misuse of privileged information. These standards are designed to uphold the quality, fairness, and credibility of the publication, fostering trust and accountability within the scholarly community.
01 Reciprocity
Reviewing for journals is a professional activity that provides value for the field as a whole, and should be encouraged. Authors who submit manuscripts to The Journal are normally expected to reciprocate by accepting an invitation to review manuscripts for The Journal.
02 Responsibility of Reviewers
Reviewers should assess the manuscript sent to them for scope, accuracy, quality, relevance and contribution to the field. The reviewers should complete the review process within two weeks of assignment.
They should inform and return the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief if they decide that the manuscript is not within their field of expertise or that they are not able to complete the review in the stated time.
The manuscript for review is privileged information. Reviewers must treat it as confidential and it should not be retained or copied in whatever means. The manuscript should not be shared with the reviewers’ colleagues without the explicit permission of the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers and Editor-in-Chief must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication. Such use may constitute as conflict of interest and is an unacceptable behaviour.
In cases of suspected misconduct, reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties.
They should inform and return the manuscript to the Editor-in-Chief if they decide that the manuscript is not within their field of expertise or that they are not able to complete the review in the stated time.
The manuscript for review is privileged information. Reviewers must treat it as confidential and it should not be retained or copied in whatever means. The manuscript should not be shared with the reviewers’ colleagues without the explicit permission of the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers and Editor-in-Chief must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication. Such use may constitute as conflict of interest and is an unacceptable behaviour.
In cases of suspected misconduct, reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties.
03 Reviewer Timeliness
Reviewers should be prompt with their reviews. If a Reviewer cannot meet the deadline, he/she should inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately to determine whether a longer time period or another Reviewer should be appointed.
Typically, the time to complete a review is two weeks.
Typically, the time to complete a review is two weeks.
