GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS

Guidelines for Reviewers

Introduction

The review process is an important aspect of the publication process of an article. It helps an editor in making a decision on an article and also enables the author to improve the manuscript.

Academic journals operate a blind peer-review system.

Before accepting to review a manuscript, reviewers should ensure that:

  • The manuscript is within their area of expertise.
  • They can dedicate the appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

"Conflict of interest (COI) exists when there is a divergence between an individual's private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual's behavior or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests." — WAME

"Reviewers should declare their conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the peer-review process if a conflict exists." — ICMJE

Confidentiality

Manuscripts are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical evaluation. Reviewers should ensure that the review process is confidential. Details of the manuscript and the review process should remain confidential during and after the review process.

Plagiarism

"Practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own." — Oxford Dictionaries

It is unethical for reviewers to "use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person's or organization's advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others." — COPE

Fairness

Reviews should be honest and objective. Reviewers should not be influenced by:

  • The origin of the manuscript.
  • Religious, political, or cultural viewpoints of the author.
  • The gender, race, ethnicity, or citizenship of the author.

Review Reports

In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on the following:

  • Originality.
  • Contribution to the field.
  • Technical quality.
  • Clarity of presentation.
  • Depth of research.

Reviewers should also:

  • Ensure that the author(s) have followed the instructions for authors, editorial policies, and publication ethics.
  • Ensure that the appropriate journal reporting guidelines have been followed.

The review report should be accurate, objective, constructive, and unambiguous. Comments should be supported by facts and constructive arguments relating to the content of the manuscript. Reviewers should avoid using "hostile, derogatory, and accusatory comments." — PIE

Reviewers should not rewrite the manuscript; however, necessary corrections and suggestions for improvement should be provided.

Timeliness

Reviewers should only accept manuscripts that they are confident they can dedicate appropriate time to reviewing. Reviewers should therefore evaluate and return manuscripts within the agreed timeframe.

Recommendations

Reviewers' recommendations should be selected from the following options:

  • Accept.
  • Requires minor corrections.
  • Requires moderate revision.
  • Requires major revision.
  • Not suitable for the journal. Submit to another publication, with a suggested journal where appropriate.
  • Reject.

Recommendations should be supported by constructive arguments and factual observations based on the content of the manuscript.

Resources