We consider manuscript refereeing as a highly-regarded and honorable service to
the readers and to the scientific community at large. Reviewers play a pivotal role
not only in helping to evaluate individual manuscript but also in determining the
overall quality of the journal. Therefore, we take great care when choosing reviewers
and take into account their expertise and reputation in the field as well as our
own past experience with them.
Reviewers should treat the whole review process and any correspondence with them
in this regards, either from the editor or from the publisher, strictly confidential,
nor should they discuss the manuscript directly with someone not involved in the
review process without the editor's prior consent.
We believe that anonymity of the reviewers is important for an objective review
of a manuscript. Therefore, we do not disclose identities of the reviewers to the
authors or to other reviewers of the manuscript, during or after the review process,
unless a reviewer specifically wants us to do so.
Our aim is to complete the whole review process and publication of a manuscript
as promptly as possible in order to keep timeliness of the published research. We
therefore ask our reviewers to respond to the editor's initial contact with them
as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours, and with their review report within
15 days unless otherwise agreed with the editor.
While writing your report please consider that the authors are most likely to have
put enormous efforts in conducting research as well as in writing the manuscript.
Therefore, aim your report to be critical but constructive and avoid using offensive
and discouraging language. In most cases reviewer's a report is conveyed to the
authors as such. However, in rare case if we feel that a reviewer has used unfair
language or have revealed any confidential information, we may appropriately edit
it. There is a standard form for writing your report. You may complete the standard
form and send it to the editor by email. While making a judgment on a manuscript
we ask you to consider the following points:
Reviewers are welcome to recommended acceptance or rejection of an article. However,
the primary purpose of the review is to provide editors with the analytical argument
to help them reach a decision. Therefore, if we have decided against a negative
or positive recommendation of a reviewer, it does not imply in any way our lack
of confidence in the reviewer's opinion or disregard for the reviewer's expertise.
It is likely that the other reviewers may have expressed opposite views and, therefore,
quite often we have to base our decisions on conflicting reports, one way or the