Information For Reviewers

The journal follows a double-blind reviewing process. This means the author(s) remain anonymous to reviewers and vice versa throughout peer review.

The role of a reviewer in an academic journal is to critically and impartially evaluate a submitted manuscript in terms of its quality, rigour, and validity. Reviewers are generally experts in their fields of study or practice, possessing relevant experience on or closely related to the topic under consideration. Their primary responsibility is to assess whether the research is methodologically sound, original, and makes a meaningful contribution to scholarly discourse. Reviewers provide comprehensive feedback to editors and authors, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript and suggesting changes for its improvement. As pivotal agents in maintaining the integrity and excellence of research publications, they also have the responsibility to ensure that the submitted manuscript adheres to universally accepted best practices in research and complies with the guidelines prescribed by the journal.

a) Pre-Review Considerations

• Expertise: Make sure that you have the appropriate expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. If you find the work to be different from your previous works, consider declining the invitation to review and recommending a colleague who can contribute.

• Time: Consider whether you have the time to complete a thorough review within the specified timeframe. If you cannot meet the deadline, please notify the Editor at the earliest.

• Ethical Guidelines: Familiarize yourself with the ethical guidelines of the journal, as well as the general guidelines for peer review followed universally. You can read more in the Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers | COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics

• Communication: Potential reviewers interested in reviewing for this journal should contact the journal's Production Editor at production.editor@ijsa-prp.in and provide their professional details (that accurately reflect their expertise and research interests), including correct and verifiable contact information.

b) Reviewer Responsibilities

• Objective Evaluation: Assess the manuscript based on its scientific merit, methodology, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

• Confidentiality: Maintain strict confidentiality of all the submitted material and do not share or use it for personal research until the manuscript is published.  In case the reviewer deems it necessary or appropriate to discuss the manuscript’s content or its assessment with anyone outside of the peer review process, it is his/her sole responsibility to secure the confidentiality of such communication. In addition, take caution not to reveal your identity to the authors in your comments to them or through metadata in Word or PDF files.

• Professionalism: Maintain a professional tone throughout the process. Your comments for the author(s) should be constructive, objective, and free of personal bias. Your role is to guide and support the author(s) in improving their work; therefore, aim to suggest clear and actionable changes, if any. If you have any questions or concerns about the review process or the submitted article, kindly communicate them clearly to the Managing Editor at submissions@ijsa-prp.in

• Recommendation: Recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, rejected, or revised (specifying major, moderate, or minor revisions). The recommendation should be based on your evaluation of the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses, as well as its relevance and contribution to the field. However, the final decision will be made by the Editor after considering the reports and recommendations of other reviewers as well.

• Timeliness: Submit reviews by the deadline to ensure an efficient editorial workflow.

c) Assessment Criteria

The review reports prepared by reviewers should address all or most of the following assessment criteria, as the Editor relies on them to evaluate the manuscript effectively:

1. Content - accuracy, depth, breadth, currency

2. Relevance of the article to the journal's readership

3. Quality and clarity of the authors' writing

4. Organization and flow of ideas

5. Adequacy of the literature review 

6. Appropriateness and soundness of the methodology adopted 

7. Correctness of statistics and data presented in tables and illustrations

8. Whether conclusions are well-supported by data

9. Recency and suitability of references

10. Any evidence of ethical misconduct

d) Post-Review Considerations

• Respond to Feedback: Be prepared to respond to any feedback or questions from the editor or the author. This may include requests for clarification or additional information.

• Review Revisions: When the manuscript is revised and resubmitted, you may be asked to review the revised version. Make sure you thoroughly review any changes or modifications made by the author(s) and evaluate whether they adequately address the issues identified in your initial review.

e) Reviewer Recognition and Benefits

• The journal is committed to acknowledging the valuable contributions of its reviewers through the following formal recognitions:

i)  Certificate of Review issued upon completion of each review.

ii) Inclusion in the Annual Reviewer Acknowledgment List published by the journal.

• As a reviewer, you play a vital role in advancing scholarly discourse by critically evaluating manuscripts that focus on emerging trends and areas of significance within your discipline. Your insights and suggestions help maintain the integrity and rigour of academic publishing, directly influencing the quality of research in your field.

• Participating in the peer review process grants early access to innovative research and enhances knowledge of the domain.

• Consistent and thoughtful reviewing builds your professional reputation, establishes you as a trusted expert, and increases your visibility within the academic community.