The peer review process is a fundamental aspect of maintaining the quality and integrity of academic publications. Reviewers play a critical role in this process. The following outlines the key responsibilities of our reviewers:

1. Confidentiality

• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. They must not share, discuss with others, or disclose any information about the manuscript except as authorized by the editor.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

2. Standards of Objectivity

• Reviews should be conducted objectively and constructively, providing clear, concise, and honest feedback to help authors improve their manuscript.
• Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Comments should be expressed clearly with supporting arguments.

3. Promptness

• Reviewers should complete their reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified to review the manuscript or is unable to provide a prompt review, they should notify the editor immediately and decline the invitation.
• If a reviewer needs more time, they should inform the editor and agree on a new deadline.

4. Contribution to Editorial Decision

• Reviewers provide recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication. While the final decision rests with the editor, reviewers' insights are invaluable in the decision-making process.
• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and highlight any substantial similarities or overlaps with other published papers of which they are personally aware.

5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their review, such as personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious factors.
• Reviewers should not accept to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

6. Ethical Considerations

• Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript and should bring these to the attention of the editor. This includes any indication of ethical breaches such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices.
• If a reviewer suspects that the work involves ethical issues, they should report it to the editor and provide as much detail as possible.

7. Acknowledgment of Sources

• Reviewers should ensure that authors have properly acknowledged all sources of data and references used in the research. Any work or data that is not properly cited should be brought to the editor's attention.
• Reviewers should ensure that the manuscript includes all the necessary and appropriate citations to previous relevant research.

8. Respect for Author

• Reviewers should respect the intellectual independence of authors and provide feedback that is constructive and respectful.
• Any criticism should be aimed at the content and quality of the manuscript, not at the authors themselves.

By fulfilling these responsibilities, our reviewers help to uphold the quality and integrity of our journals, contributing to the advancement of knowledge and the maintenance of high scholarly standards.