Guidelines for Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editorial board in making decisions regarding submitted manuscripts. In addition, reviewers’ comments—communicated through the editorial board—may help authors improve their papers. Peer review lies at the heart of the scholarly publishing process.

Promptness
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or cannot complete the review within the journal’s specified timeframe should notify the editor immediately and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support them with sound arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Proper citation should accompany any statement that relies on previously reported data, findings, or arguments. Reviewers must also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work known to them.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own paper without the author’s explicit written consent. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or funding sources associated with the manuscript should immediately notify the editors and decline the review invitation, so that alternative reviewers may be assigned.