Duties and Responsibilities of the Reviewers

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining the quality, rigor, and integrity of the journal. They are expected to approach each manuscript with professionalism, fairness, and a constructive mindset. The primary responsibility of a reviewer is to assist the Editor in evaluating the manuscript and to provide feedback that will help the authors improve their work. Reviews should offer clear and focused insight into the scientific contribution, the soundness of the arguments, and any areas where clarification or revision may be needed.

Reviewers are asked to remain attentive to any potential ethical issues, such as overlap with previously published work, omission of essential references, or elements that appear inconsistent or questionable. Any such concerns should be communicated confidentially to the Editor.

Reviewers are expected to respond to review invitations in a timely manner so as not to introduce unnecessary delays into the evaluation process. If a reviewer is unable to undertake the review—whether due to limited time, insufficient expertise, or the presence of a potential conflict of interest—they should decline promptly. Should such issues become apparent after accepting an invitation, the reviewer should notify the Editor or Managing Editor without delay.

Reviews should be constructive, courteous, and well structured. Feedback should be balanced, addressing both strengths and substantive concerns, and should focus on major issues rather than minor details. The goal of the review is to support the authors in strengthening the manuscript and to assist the Editor in reaching an informed decision.

Reviewers are expected to be transparent regarding any actual or potential conflicts of interest. Conflicts may arise from personal, professional, financial, or institutional relationships, including recent collaborations, shared affiliations, close personal ties, prior involvement with the manuscript, or competing research activities. When unsure whether a conflict exists, reviewers should consult the Editor before proceeding.

Reviewers must also report any suspected research or publication misconduct, including plagiarism, inappropriate reuse of material, data manipulation, or other ethical concerns. Such matters will be handled by the Editor, Editor-in-Chief, and ethics committee following established procedures.

Confidentiality is a fundamental expectation of the review process. Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential and may not be shared or discussed outside the review process, nor may reviewers contact the authors directly. If a reviewer wishes to involve a colleague or student for training purposes, they must first obtain permission from the Editor. Unpublished ideas, data, or methods encountered during the review must not be used for personal research or disclosed to others.