Reviewer Guidance
Reviewers provide independent scholarly assessment of manuscripts and support rigorous, fair and timely editorial decisions.
Review model
Double-anonymous; minimum 2 independent reviewers.
Before accepting a review
- Confirm that the manuscript is reasonably within your expertise.
- Disclose any financial, professional, personal or academic conflict of interest.
- Accept only when you can provide a careful review within the requested timeframe.
- Decline if confidentiality or independence cannot be maintained.
What reviewers should assess
- Originality, significance and fit with the journal scope.
- Soundness of the research question, design, methods and analysis.
- Clarity and completeness of results and interpretation.
- Appropriate use of prior literature and accurate citation practice.
- Transparency of data, methods, ethics and limitations where applicable.
- Whether conclusions are supported by the evidence presented.
Reviewer report
Reports should be specific, constructive and focused on the scholarly content. Reviewers should distinguish essential revisions from optional suggestions and avoid personal, discriminatory or hostile language.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts and related editorial information are confidential. Reviewers must not share unpublished material or use privileged information for personal, competitive or commercial advantage.
Use of AI tools
Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or substantial manuscript content to external AI systems that may retain, process or expose the material. Any permitted tool use must preserve confidentiality and reviewer accountability.
Recommendations
Typical recommendations are Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision or Reject. Reviewer recommendations are advisory; final decisions are made by qualified editors.