Submit Manuscript

Guide For Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a key role in ensuring the integrity of scholarly work. To a large extent, the peer review process depends on the trust and willing participation of scholars and the 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 reviews. We at Emres Publishers follow a double-blinded peer review process where the details of reviewers are unknown to authors, and vice versa.

Below are a few key roles and responsibilities to be followed by peer reviewers:

  • A reviewer should agree to review manuscripts only if they have adequate ability to carry out a proper evaluation in a timely manner.
  • If a reviewer believes that they are not an expert in reviewing a manuscript, they should return it to the editor immediately.
  • Reviewers must ensure confidentiality regarding the manuscripts they are reviewing and should not disclose any details of the manuscript throughout and even after the review process.
  • Reviewers must not use any unpublished information from the manuscript for their own benefit or for others.
  • Reviewers must ensure that their personal and professional skills accurately represent their abilities.
  • Reviewers must refrain from making insulting and offensive personal comments about the manuscripts they are assigned to review.
  • Reviewers should seek clarification from the editor if they find any conflict of interest, whether it is personal, financial, intellectual, professional, religious, or political.
  • Reviewers should not review a manuscript that is similar to one they are preparing or have submitted to another publisher for consideration.
  • If there is any evidence of plagiarism, duplicate submission to another journal, unethical research design, or unnecessary manipulation of results to achieve multiple manuscript publications, reviewers should comment on these issues.
  • Reviewers must submit a report to the editor if they find any similarity between the manuscript under consideration and a previously published paper in the same or another journal.
  • Without the consent of the editor or author, a reviewer should not disclose any unpublished information, interpretations, or arguments contained in the manuscript under consideration.
  • For the effective evaluation of a manuscript, a reviewer should not agree to review the manuscript of an author with whom they have a personal or professional relationship.