Reviewer Invitation & Recognition Policy

Reviewer Invitation & Recognition Policy

(Compliant with SCI Journal Standards)

1. Reviewer Invitation

To ensure rigorous peer review, reviewers are selected based on academic qualifications, subject-matter expertise, and publication history in indexed journals. The Editorial Office sends formal invitations via email or submission system (e.g., ScholarOne, Editorial Manager), including:

  • Manuscript title and abstract

  • Expected review timeframe (typically 14–21 days)

  • Ethical obligations and confidentiality expectations

  • Reviewer response options (Accept / Decline / Suggest alternative)

Selection Criteria:

  • Doctoral degree or equivalent research credentials

  • Active publishing record in SCI or Scopus-indexed journals

  • Demonstrated expertise aligned with the manuscript's topic

  • No potential conflicts of interest with the authors

2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

All invited reviewers are expected to adhere to international peer review standards and uphold the following responsibilities:

  • Objectivity: Deliver unbiased, evidence-based evaluations without personal remarks

  • Constructiveness: Provide actionable, professional feedback to improve manuscript quality

  • Confidentiality: Maintain strict confidentiality of all manuscript content

  • Timeliness: Submit the review within the agreed timeframe (preferably within 2–3 weeks)

  • Ethical Compliance: Follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

  • Recommendation: Provide a justified and clear recommendation (Accept / Minor Revision / Major Revision / Reject)

3. Conflict of Interest (COI)

Reviewers must disclose any actual or perceived conflict of interest, including but not limited to:

  • Recent collaboration or co-authorship with any author (within the last 3 years)

  • Shared institutional affiliations

  • Financial, personal, or academic relationships

If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the invitation or notify the editorial office immediately to avoid compromising the review's impartiality.

4. Reviewer Recognition & Incentives

To formally acknowledge the contribution of our reviewers, we offer a structured recognition program:

  • Annual Reviewer Certificate: Digital certificates issued upon request or annually

  • Reviewer Acknowledgment: Inclusion in an annual reviewer appreciation list published on the journal website or in print

  • Outstanding Reviewer Award: Recognizes exceptional reviewers based on timeliness, quality, and impact of reviews

  • Discount on APCs: Eligible reviewers may receive partial or full waivers for article processing charges

  • Integration with Publons / ORCID: Verified reviews can be automatically registered through our submission system

High-performing reviewers may be invited to join the Editorial Board or act as Lead Reviewers for special issues.

5. Performance Monitoring

Reviewer performance is evaluated based on the following:

  • Review Timeliness: Punctual submission of reviewer reports

  • Review Quality: Depth, clarity, and constructiveness of feedback

  • Professionalism: Tone, format, and adherence to ethical standards

  • Editorial Feedback: Assessment by handling editors on usefulness and reliability of the review

Persistent non-responsiveness, repeated delays, or unethical conduct will result in removal from the reviewer database.

6. Confidentiality & Ethics

All peer reviewers must strictly protect the confidentiality of the manuscripts they review. Reviewers may not:

  • Share manuscript content with third parties

  • Use unpublished data for personal research or gain

  • Store or distribute the manuscript in any form

We are committed to the highest standards of peer review integrity, as endorsed by COPE, ICMJE, and WAME.

Compliance & Accreditation:
This policy aligns with the standards required by major indexing services such as Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed, and meets the ethical expectations of international academic publishing.