Ethics of Reviewers

Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the review process. They should not discuss aspects of the work under review with other researchers until when the article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a Reviewer without the express written consent of the author, requested through the Editor. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantages.

Conflicts of interest: If the Reviewer realizes that he or she has been involved in the research carried out, knows the Authors involved in the research, or for any reason cannot give an objective review of the manuscript, the Reviewer should inform the Editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest can include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper under review.

Objectivity: Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the Reviewer’s expertise in the field. The importance of the article’s contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing the quality of a manuscript. Personal opinions without evidence should not be used as criteria for review decision.

Acknowledgment of sources: Reviewers should identify importantly relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A Reviewer should also inform the Editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.