Introduction Article review process is a necessary component of the publication process involved with an article. Peer review helps an editor in making editorial decision about an article and more importantly it also enables the author to improve their manuscript. Journal BiNET operates a blind peer review system. Before accepting to review a manuscript reviewer should ensure that the manuscript is within their area of expertise and they can dedicate appropriate time to conduct a critical review of the manuscript.
Timeliness Reviewers should only accept manuscript for evaluation, when they are confident that they can dedicate appropriate time in proper reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner to avoid any delay of editorial decision on a manuscript and thereafter publication.
Confidentiality Manuscripts of authors are confidential materials given to a reviewer in trust for the sole purpose of critical and scientific evaluation towards comments and suggestions. Reviewers should ensure that the whole review processes remains confidential. Any details regarding the manuscript and associated various step of review process should remain confidential during and after the review process.
Fairness Reviews should be honest and objective in relation to a manuscript. Reviewers should not be influenced by the subject matter of the manuscript, origin of the manuscript, religious, political or cultural viewpoint of the author; and gender, race, ethnicity or citizenry of the author (s).
Review Reporting and Recommendations During review of a manuscript, reviewers should focus and look for on the originality, contribution to the field, technical quality, data analysis, clarity of presentation and depth of research. The report should be accurate, objective, constructive, justified and unambiguous. Comments should be backed by facts and constructive arguments with regards to the content of the manuscript.
A reviewer recommendation should be either:
Accept as it is
Requires minor corrections
Requires moderate revision
Requires major revision
Not suitable for the journal. Submit to another publication such as (suggest a journal)
A reviewer recommendation should be supported with sufficient constructive arguments and facts based on the content of the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest Conflict of interest (COI) exists when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests. In case of Journal BiNET, COI exists when a participant in the publication process (author, peer reviewer or editor) has a competing interest that could unduly influence (or be reasonably seen to do so) his or her responsibilities in the publication process. Among those responsibilities are academic honesty, unbiased conduct and reporting of research and integrity of decisions or judgments. The publication process includes the submission of manuscripts, peer review, editorial decisions and communication between authors, reviewers and editors. Many kinds of competing interests are possible such as financial ties, academic commitments (i.e., strong belief may bias a research and its results !), personal relationships, political and religious belief and institutional affiliations. Journals often have policies for managing financial COI, mostly based on the untested assumption that financial ties have an especially powerful influence over publication decisions and may not be apparent unless they are made explicit. However, other competing interests can be just as damaging and just as hidden to most participants, and so must also be managed (text adapted from wame).
Key Notes For Reviewer !
Primarily accepted original manuscript of author which meets minimum manuscript preparation criteria is sent to two (2) potential reviewer of similar specialization as email attachments with an Article ID.
Reviewer major responsibilities are article review and comments based on manuscript contents, by using preferably MS word track review options, and opinions on manuscript standards of objectivity.
Promptness and confidentiality is crucial for faster publication. A reviewer is expected to return an article after review preferably within few weeks.
A reviewer, if required, can submit comments and decision through 'Reviewer Comments Form' during review reporting and recommendations, this form is sent to each reviewer as email attachment.
Apart from review and editorial task, reviewer can recommend any decision about an article in terms of its scientific standards and encourage to contribute in editorial decision of an article; but editor and reviewer is suppose to help authors; such as how an article could be improved with efficient suggestions; so that author does not become hopeless towards scientific literature writings.
Important ! editor and reviewer does not suppose to make personal comments, use words of demoralization rather focus on strength of an article and highlight weakness in proper ways along with specific suggestions to improve an article towards scientific merits and article objectivity.
Article formatting to specific journal style & content into a publishing template, and associated referencing style are tasks of the Editorial Office and or reported to author before 'Galley Proof' preparation after final acceptance of an article.
Editor and reviewer are suggested not to contact authors of a manuscript / article by any means.
A reviewed manuscript is finally accepted with minor corrections, or sent to authors for revision (if re-submitted, review start over again with first reviewers) or rejected depending on review reports and then editorial decisions by editor of Journal BiNET.
An accepted article is further processed and formatted for publication in the website as online version.