Reviewers Responsibilities

Contribution of Editorial Decisions: The peer review process assists the editor in making editorial decisions; it also assists the author to improve the paper by providing them with feedback and editorial communications.

Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that they cannot complete the review in a timely manner, should inform the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be kept confidential documents. Referees should not show them to or discuss them with anyone else except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and without any personal criticism of the author. Referees are expected to express their opinions clearly and provide supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. If an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported, the reviewer should provide a relevant citation. Reviewers should also inform the editor of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper that they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review and not use it for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.