Select one

Reviewers responsibilities Last Update : 2020-11-01 15:04:28

Reviewers responsibilities

The reviewer is responsible for both the author and the editor in regard to the manuscript. Peer review is the principal mechanism by which the quality of research is judged. Most funding decisions in science and the academic advancement of scientists are based on peer-reviewed publications.

Peer reviewer responsibilities towards the author

  1. Providing written, unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work
  2. Comments given by the reviewers should be clear and relevant to the subject and accurate which creates interest to the authors.
  3. Personal & Financial conflicts must be avoided.
  4. The review process should be confidentially maintained.

Peer reviewer responsibilities towards the editor


  1. Notifying the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner and providing the names of other potential reviewers if possible.
  2. Following the editor's written instructions on the journal's expectations of the submitted work
  3. Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it and giving decisions based on rating
  4. Provide a clear and levelheaded reason for giving decisions based on common ethics
  5. Personal & Financial conflicts should be alerted
  6. Stave off direct contact with the author without editor's permission.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: - Reviews and reviewer comments should be held confidentially. manuscripts or copies of the process shouldn't be retained with the reviewers after the process is commenced
  2. Constructive Evaluation: - Decisions and judgment should be constructive that provides legible insight to the author without any controversy or inefficiencies with the review process
  3. Competence: -Reviewer with passable expertise will serve the purpose to complete the review. People lacking adequate expertise should feel responsible and can decline the review.
  4. Impartiality and Integrity: - Reviewer decision should solely depend on scientific merit, relevance to the subject, scope of the journal rather on financial, racial, ethnic origin etc… of the authors.
  5. Timeliness and Responsiveness: - Reviewer should be responsible to complete the review within the relevant time and should take all necessary steps to fulfill the limitations of the journal.

Special Benefits to the Reviewers with Highest Scientific Credit 

  1. Complete waiver on registration and accommodation fee at relevant Kowsar Conferences
  2. Discount on Acceptance fee for the published article.