Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are essential to ensuring the quality and integrity of published articles. This document outlines the expectations and best practices for conducting peer reviews for our journal.

1. Ethical Considerations

  • Confidentiality: 
  • Treat manuscripts as confidential documents and do not share them with others.
  • Conflict of Interest:
  • Disclose any conflicts of interest that could compromise your impartiality.
  • Respect and Professionalism: 
  • Provide constructive feedback and avoid derogatory comments.

3. Conducting the Review

When reviewing a manuscript, the following factors must be carefully considered:

  1. Area of Expertise:
    • Ensure the article falls within your field of expertise. If not, inform the editor promptly to reassign the manuscript.
  2. Time Commitment:
    • Allocate sufficient time for a thorough review. Decline the invitation if time constraints prevent you from completing it within the deadline.
  3. Confidentiality:
    • Do not share the manuscript or its contents with anyone. The review process is strictly confidential.
  4. Understanding the Content:
    • Read the manuscript thoroughly, and align your review with the article’s intent and the journal’s scope.
  5. Reasoned Feedback:
    • Provide logical, well-founded comments. Ensure your critique is objective, constructive, and free from personal bias.

4. Communicating Your Report to the Editor

While preparing and submitting your review report, keep the following in mind:

  1. Key Elements:
    • Focus on the article's main sections (abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion) when structuring your feedback.
    • Avoid overly lengthy reports; concise yet comprehensive feedback is preferred.
  2. Journal Standards:
    • Compare the manuscript with the journal’s quality and relevance standards. Highlight areas needing improvement.
  3. Recommendations:
    • Clearly state your recommendation (accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject) with justifications. Ensure your general observations align with your final recommendation.
  4. Submission:
    • Submit your report through the journal’s designated platform or directly to the editor.

5. Timelines and Deadlines

Timely reviews ensure a smooth editorial process and prompt publication.

  • Completion Timeline:
    • Reviews must be completed and submitted within 14 days from the date of invitation.
  • Consequences of Delay:
    • Delays impact the editor’s decision and overall publishing timeline, which can hinder the journal’s credibility. If an extension is needed, please notify the editor promptly.

Recommendation Criteria

When making your recommendation, consider:

  • Acceptance
  • The manuscript meets all journal standards and requires no further revisions.
  • Minor Revision
  • Minor changes are needed to improve clarity or formatting.
  • Major Revision
  • Substantial revisions are necessary, but the manuscript has potential.
  • Rejection
  • The manuscript falls outside the journal's scope and does not align with its standards or scientific requirements.

Thank you for your commitment and valuable contribution to the peer-review process. Your efforts uphold the quality and integrity of Journal of Engineering and Artificial Intelligence. If you have any inquiries or require assistance, feel free to reach out to us at info@academicsquare-pub.com.