Reviewers’ Criteria and Responsibilities

Reviewer Criteria and Responsibilities

1. Academic Expertise and Specialization:
Reviewers must possess precise specialization and proven academic experience in the subject area of the manuscript, enabling them to provide critical evaluation and constructive suggestions that enhance the quality of the research.

2. Continuous Updating:
Reviewers are expected to remain up to date with the latest developments in their field and to be transparent about their ability to complete the review before accepting the assignment.

3. Timeliness:
Reviewers are required to submit their evaluations within the specified timeframe indicated in the review form, in order to avoid delays in the publication process.

4. Confidentiality:
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all manuscript content and refrain from using it for personal or research purposes.

5. Objectivity and Impartiality:
Evaluations should be conducted with objectivity and fairness, in accordance with the standards of scientific research and publishing ethics.

6. Conflict of Interest:
Reviewers must decline to evaluate manuscripts where any personal, institutional, financial, or collaborative conflict of interest exists, and they are obliged to disclose such circumstances to the Editorial Board.

7. Constructive Feedback:
Reviewers should focus on improving the manuscript by providing practical recommendations and clear explanations, while avoiding unjustified or offensive criticism.

8. Acknowledgment of Missing References:
If important references or necessary citations are absent, reviewers should alert authors to ensure the integrity of scientific documentation.

9. Reporting Misconduct:
In cases of suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, or breach of research ethics, reviewers are expected to notify the Editorial Board with a detailed report.

10. Non-Exploitation of Manuscripts:
Reviewers must not use any unpublished ideas, data, or results from the manuscript for their personal or academic benefit.