Guide For Reviewers
Peer reviewers play a key role in ensuring the integrity of the scholarly work. To a large extent the peer review process depends on the trust and willing participation of the scholars and ethical and responsible behavior of everyone involved in the process. Peer reviewers play a significant and crucial part in the peer review process but may come to the role without any guidance and be unaware of their ethical obligations. Journals have an obligation to provide transparent policies for peer review, and reviewers have an obligation to conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. Clear communication between the journal and the reviewers is essential to facilitate consistent, fair and timely review. We at Emres Publishers follow a double-blinded peer review process where the details of reviewers is unknown to authors and vice versa.
Below mentioned are few key roles and responsibilities to be followed by peer reviewers
- A reviewer should agree to review the manuscripts only in which he/she have an adequate ability in carrying out a proper evaluation in a timely way.
- If a reviewer believes that he/she is not an expert in reviewing a manuscript, then he/she should return it to the editor immediately.
- A Reviewer must make sure that they keep up confidentiality about manuscript they are reviewing and should not make others conscious about the details of manuscript throughout and even after the review process.
- A Reviewer must not use any unpublished information from the manuscript for the benefit of their own or others.
- A Reviewer must make sure that his/her personal and professional skills furnished are the exact representation of their ability.
- A Reviewer must make sure that they are unbiased from making insulting and offensive personal comments for the manuscripts assigned.
- A Reviewer should seek clarification from the editor if they found any conflict of interest either it may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, religious or political
- A Reviewer should not review the manuscript which is similar to the one they are preparing or have submitted to another publisher for consideration.
- If there is any confirmation of plagiarism, duplicate submission to another journal, unethical research design or unnecessary disintegration of results to achieve multiple manuscript publications then reviewers are ought to comment on those.
- A Reviewer must submit a report to the editor if they found any similarity among the manuscript under consideration and previously published paper in same or another journal.
- Without the consent of the editor or author, a reviewer should not let others know about any unpublished information, interpretations or arguments contained in the manuscript under consideration.
- For the effective judgment of a manuscript, a reviewer should not agree to review the manuscript of an author with whom he/she has a personal or professional relationship.