Reviewer guidelines

Reviewer's plays a crucial role in judging the quality of submitted manuscripts along with the support of Editorial Board Members to maintain quality Peer-Review process. The assigned reviewers are supposed to submit their comments to Editorial office by inclining to one of the below decision, the final decision would be always with Editorial Board member.

The identity of the reviewers should never be revealed out to the authors at any time either during the process of review or after article publication too. The papers should not be revealed to other people without Editors/ Editorial office notice.

Reviewer's comments should support one of the below-mentioned acts.

  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject
  • Reviewer's Instructions

Unbiased Comments

The Peer review comments provided by reviewers must be transparent, unbiased and should not involve personal or professional conflicts.

The Quality of article

The comments given by reviewer must relevant and support to increase the quality of the manuscript. Minor corrections like grammatical errors can be corrected by reviewer itself. Be specific and detail while providing comments.

Timely decision

Based on the publication date of the manuscript the comments from reviewer are expected to be within the time period assigned by the Editorial office. The review period allotted for the reviewer is ten days. Reviewers can request editorial office if they need to extend the review period.

Confidential Comments

Review Comments that are provided by reviewer should be strictly confidential, should not let know to others except Editorial office. Never reveal the assigned paper's results or videos/images or any of the supplementary material to non-reviewers.

Important Points to be noted

Reviewers are requested not to use any information of the assigned data unless they have the written statement of the authors.

Infrequently you will be assigned to review submissions from non-English native language authors, in that case, it will also be imperative for a reviewer to differentiate between the quality of the manuscript and the quality of the ideas that the manuscript put across.

These manuscripts may be good even if they are not articulated well.

Please mention the proper and reasons to reject the article like what are the weak points and the area to be improved further.

Any kind of conflicts can be resolved at editorial office.

Reviewers would be provided with benefits like a concession on processing fee while submitting the manuscript.

ARJ @ SOCIAL

openaccess

ARJ Tweets