Reviewer Guideline

Reviewer Guidelines

The "Researchers Gate Journal for Studies and Research" strictly employs a Double-Blind Peer Review system to ensure the highest levels of rigor and impartiality. Reviewers are the fundamental pillar in maintaining the journal's quality and scientific standing. To ensure the review process aligns with international standards and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), reviewers are requested to follow these guidelines and procedures:

  1. Registration and Assignment:
  • The reviewer must have an official registered account on the journal's electronic platform, allowing them to act as a reviewer (and concurrently as an author, if desired).
  • The reviewer will receive a formal invitation via their registered email, notifying them of a new review assignment, including the manuscript's title and abstract.
  1. Before Accepting the Review (Suitability & Conflict of Interest):
  • Expertise: The reviewer must ensure that the manuscript's subject falls strictly within their specific or general field of expertise.
  • Conflict of Interest: The reviewer must immediately decline the invitation if there is any potential conflict of interest (personal, financial, or institutional), or if they can somehow identify the author(s).
  • Timeliness: Reviewers are kindly requested to accept or decline the invitation as promptly as possible. This allows the editorial board to assign an alternative reviewer if necessary, avoiding delays in the publication process.
  1. During the Review Process (Confidentiality & Objectivity):
  • Strict Confidentiality: The manuscript under review is a highly confidential document. The reviewer must not share it, discuss it with third parties, or use its data prior to publication.
  • Objectivity: Criticism must be scientific, objective, constructive, and supported by evidence. Personal criticism or derogatory remarks directed at the author are strictly prohibited.
  1. Submitting the Report and Feedback:
  • After thoroughly reading the manuscript, the reviewer completes the approved electronic "Evaluation Form" on the platform, which covers aspects such as originality, methodology, language accuracy, recency of references, and results.
  • If there are detailed comments or corrections within the text, the reviewer can note them in a separate document (or as comments within the manuscript file, provided they ensure their personal identifying information is removed from the file properties to maintain the blind review) and upload it via the platform.
  1. Post-Review (Editorial Decision and Follow-up):
  • Upon submitting the report, the reviewer receives an automated acknowledgment email thanking them for their contribution.
  • The editorial board reviews the reports and forwards the feedback to the author (strictly maintaining the anonymity of the reviewers), mandating the author to make the required revisions.
  • Once the revised manuscript is resubmitted, the editorial board (or the reviewer, if requested) verifies the author's compliance with all the provided feedback before making a final acceptance decision.