Reviewer guidelines

What we ask of you

Turnaround

21 days from accepting the invitation

Workload cap

Never more than 2 manuscripts at once

Response window

Accept or decline within 7 days

The 2-manuscript cap is enforced by the system, not merely a guideline. You will not be invited to a third concurrent review, and a slot frees the moment you submit a report.

What you will be asked to score

Each criterion is rated from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent).

• Originality & Novelty
• Technical / Scientific Quality
• Methodology Soundness
• Clarity of Presentation & Language
• Significance of Contribution
• Literature Coverage & Referencing
• Figures & Tables Quality
• Suitability for the Journal

Writing your report

• • Summarise the manuscript in your own words (at least 50 words) so the editor can see you have read it as intended.
• • Write at least 100 words of comments to the author, separated into major issues, minor issues and strengths.
• • Be specific. "The methods are unclear" helps nobody; "the sampling frame in section 3.2 is not stated" does.
• • Be courteous. Criticise the work, never the authors.
• • Use the confidential comments box for anything the author should not see.
• • Flag any ethical concern — suspected plagiarism, fabricated data, manipulated images or undisclosed conflicts.
• • Declare a conflict of interest and decline if you cannot review impartially.

Confidentiality and anonymity

Manuscripts under review are confidential. Do not share them, quote them, or use their findings before publication. Files you download are watermarked with your reviewer number and the date, and every access is logged. Your identity is never disclosed to the authors under any circumstance.

Recognition

• • A journal-branded certificate of review, signed by the Editor-in-Chief, for every completed review.
• • An export of your verified review record for Web of Science reviewer recognition.
• • Annual recognition of our outstanding reviewers.