Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
- Reviewers must inform the Editor immediately if they lack expertise in the subject area or are unable to meet the review deadline.
- Reviews should be submitted on time. If delayed, reviewers must notify the Editor with a revised timeline.
- Reviews must be objective, constructive, and based solely on academic merit, without personal or biased judgment.
- Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate; feedback should be respectful and clear.
- Confidentiality must be maintained. Reviewers must not use manuscript content for personal use or share it publicly.
- Any conflicts of interest (personal, financial, intellectual, etc.) must be disclosed to the Editor.
- If unable to review impartially, the reviewer should decline the review request.
- Suspected plagiarism, fabrication, or ethical issues in research should be reported to the Editor.
- Reviewers must evaluate originality, methodology, and relevance of the work, and provide clear, actionable comments for authors.
- A brief summary and final recommendation (Accept, Minor/Major Revision, or Reject) should be included in the review report.
- Feedback must be courteous, detailed, and helpful for both the Editor and author(s).