Reviewers Responsibilities
The peer review process is a fundamental part of maintaining the integrity, quality, and academic rigor of the Tech-Sphere Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences (TSJPAS). As a reviewer, you play a vital role in ensuring that manuscripts meet the highest standards of research excellence. Below are the key responsibilities expected from reviewers:
1. Evaluating Manuscripts
-
Assess Scientific Quality: Reviewers are responsible for critically evaluating the scientific quality and originality of the manuscript. This includes assessing the validity and reliability of the research methods, data analysis, and results.
-
Provide Objective Feedback: Ensure that feedback is constructive, clear, and respectful. Reviewers should provide detailed suggestions for improving the manuscript, addressing both major and minor issues.
-
Check Relevance: Ensure the manuscript is relevant to the scope and focus of the journal. If a manuscript falls outside the journal’s scope, the reviewer should suggest this in their feedback.
2. Ethical Standards
-
Ensure Ethical Research: Reviewers should verify that the research adheres to ethical standards. This includes ensuring that proper consent has been obtained for human or animal research and that the study complies with ethical guidelines.
-
Detect Plagiarism and Misconduct: Reviewers should be alert for signs of plagiarism, data fabrication, or other research misconduct. If there are concerns, they should raise these issues with the editorial team.
-
Confidentiality: All manuscript details must remain confidential during the review process. Reviewers should not discuss the manuscript with others or use information from the manuscript for personal gain.
3. Timeliness
-
Meet Review Deadlines: Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the time frame set by the journal. Delays can impact the publication process and the author’s ability to revise and resubmit their work in a timely manner.
-
Communicate Any Delays: If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the requested time frame due to other commitments or personal reasons, they should notify the editorial team as soon as possible.
4. Objectivity and Impartiality
-
Be Objective: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on their academic and scientific merit, not on personal biases. It is important to remain impartial and focus solely on the quality of the research.
-
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. If there is any relationship with the authors or subject matter that could compromise impartiality, the reviewer should recuse themselves from the review process.
-
Constructive Criticism: Feedback should be constructive and aimed at improving the manuscript. Reviewers should avoid overly harsh or disparaging comments and instead focus on providing helpful, actionable suggestions.
5. Reviewer Suggestions
-
Provide Clear Recommendations: After reviewing the manuscript, reviewers should provide a clear recommendation to the editor regarding whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.
-
Suggest Improvements: When recommending revisions, reviewers should suggest specific areas where the manuscript can be improved. This could include suggestions on data analysis, writing clarity, structure, or additional references to be included.
-
Highlight Strengths and Weaknesses: It is important to balance criticism with recognition of the manuscript's strengths, highlighting both what works well and what requires attention.
6. Independence
-
Avoid Personal Bias: Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts independently of any personal or professional relationships with the authors. Personal biases, competitive concerns, or professional disagreements should not influence the review process.
-
Focus on Scientific Integrity: The primary responsibility of the reviewer is to uphold the integrity of the research and the scientific community by ensuring that only high-quality, trustworthy research is published.
7. Acknowledging Conflicts of Interest
-
Declare Conflicts: Reviewers should disclose any conflicts of interest at the beginning of the review process. This includes financial interests, personal relationships, or any other factors that might affect objectivity.
-
Recuse If Necessary: If a conflict of interest arises during the review process, reviewers should immediately recuse themselves from evaluating the manuscript and inform the editorial team.
8. Reviewer Recognition
-
Acknowledgement: Reviewers' contributions are highly valued and acknowledged in the journal. All reviewers will be formally thanked for their efforts in the journal’s annual report or in the acknowledgments section of the journal.
-
Opportunities for Recognition: For reviewers who consistently contribute high-quality feedback, there may be opportunities for special recognition or invitations to join the journal’s editorial board.
Contact Information
If you have any questions or concerns about the review process, please feel free to contact the editorial office at: