For Reviewers

Review Criteria

Reviewers are the key to the success of every journal and are deeply appreciated, it’s important that reviewers give comprehensive unbiased suggestions based on the following criteria.



Does the research fit the aim and scope of the journal?



Does the research have proposed novel ideas, approaches, and results, or have further developed the former research?

Does the research have a certain impact on the field?



Is the paper designed in a clear, logical, and appropriate way with sufficient details to support it?

Does the design have validity with confounding variables, biases, subjects, settings, and conditions addressed?


Title and Abstract

Does the title represent the paper adequately?

Does the abstract summarize the background, key contents, research purpose, significance, and methods used?


MethodsData, and Availability

Are the methods appropriate for the research?

Are the methods sufficiently explained in detail to permit the research to be replicated?

Are the data necessary, reliable, appropriate, and sufficient for the research?



Do the data and methods support the interpretations and conclusions?

Are the conclusions and potential impact clear and reasonable?



Does the paper have grammatical errors?

Is the paper understandable with accurate word usage?


Ethical Standards for Reviewers
Ensuring Fairness
Reviewers should carefully examine personal schedules and research areas before accepting to review to make sure reviewing process can be conducted efficiently and timely. In addition, reviewers should give unbiased remarks on the manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the Authors.

Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must consult the Editor before agreeing to review manuscripts for which they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to this paper. While waiting for a response, refrain from looking at the manuscript and associated material in case the request to review is rescinded.

Detecting Misconduct
If reviewers have noticed the substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, reviewers should contact the Editor immediately.

Reviewers should not disclose any information obtained during the peer-review process, or use the unpublished materials in their research without the written consent of the Author.