Peer review is the system for assessing the quality, validity, and significance of scholarly research. The legitimacy of scientific literature depends on effective peer review. The peer review process is intended to provide authors with constructive feedback from expert reviewers which makes their work move towards perfection thus ensuring it is of the greatest standard possible.
The Review Process
Reviewers are invited to review a manuscript through an email invitation. The reviewers should:
- Only accept to review manuscripts which fall under their subject expertise to carry out a proper evaluation in a timely manner.
- Respect the confidentiality of peer review and must not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
Double-check the manuscript title page and the Acknowledgments section to verify whether there is any conflict of interest for you (with the authors, their institution, or their funding sources) and whether you can review the article impartially.
Abstract – Has this been provided (if required)? Does it sufficiently summarize the key findings/approach of the paper?
Length – Reviewers are asked to judge whether the content of a paper is of sufficient interest to justify its length. The paper should be of shortest length possible and contain all useful and relevant information.
Novelty – Is the work relevant and novel? Does it contain significant additional material to that already published?
Presentation – Is the writing style clear and appropriate to the readership? Are any tables or graphics clear to read and labeled appropriately?
References – Does the paper include the proper referencing to provide adequate context for the present work?
Once you’ve read the paper and have evaluated its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the editor regarding publication. The specific decision types used by a journal may vary but the key decisions are:
Accept – If the paper is acceptable for publication in its present form.
Minor revision – If the paper will be ready for publication after minor revisions. Kindly list the revisions you would recommend the author makes.
Major revision – If the paper would benefit from substantial changes such as expanded data analysis, widening of the literature review, or rewriting sections of the text.
Reject – If the paper is not appropriate for publication with this journal or if the revisions that would need to be undertaken are too fundamental for the submission to continue being considered in its present form.
In your comments anticipated for the author, do not make statements about the acceptability of a paper (see the next paragraph); suggested revisions should be stated as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Organize your review so that an introductory paragraph summarizes the key findings of the article, gives your overall impression of the paper, and highlights the major deficiencies. This paragraph should be followed by specific, numbered comments, which, if appropriate, may be subdivided into major and minor points. (The numbering facilitates both the editor’s letter to the author and evaluation of the author’s rebuttal.) Criticism should be presented dispassionately; offensive remarks are not acceptable.
If you are asked to review a paper when you do not have adequate time to review or engaged in any other important works, you should make the editorial office aware that you are unavailable at the earliest possibilities. It is very helpful if you could recommend an alternative expert or someone whose opinion you trust.
If you are unable to complete your report on a paper in the agreed time-frame required by the journal, please inform the editorial office as soon as possible so that the refereeing procedure is not delayed.
Make the editors aware of any potential conflicts of interest that may affect the paper under review.
Decision of the Editorial Board is final regarding publication of any manuscript.
We welcome researchers, academicians, scientists and scholars interested in serving as volunteer reviewer.
If you are interested in joining as a reviewer for our journals, kindly mail us your CV along with the journal of interest to info@proskolar.org. Respective Journal Team will respond to you at the earliest.
