Reviewer Policies

The key reviewer-related policies and general publishing policies followed by the International Journal of Engineering Research and Science & Technology (IJERST). These policies help ensure that the journal adheres to high standards of academic integrity, fairness, and transparency in the peer review process.

1. Reviewers Guidelines

IJERST provides clear Reviewers' Guidelines to ensure the peer review process is rigorous, fair, and transparent. Reviewers are expected to follow these guidelines when evaluating manuscripts:

  • Objective Evaluation: Reviewers should assess the manuscript based on its scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal's scope, without being influenced by personal views or conflicts of interest. The review process should be based purely on the quality of the research presented.

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to treat the manuscript as confidential. The manuscript should not be discussed with anyone or used for personal gain. Reviewers must not share the contents of the manuscript with anyone who is not directly involved in the review process.

  • Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to provide their feedback within the time frame set by the journal. Delays in the review process can slow down publication and negatively affect authors and the academic community.

  • Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are encouraged to provide clear, constructive, and specific feedback to help authors improve their work. Reviewers should avoid personal criticism of the authors and instead focus on the scientific and technical aspects of the manuscript.

  • Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality during the review process. If there is any possibility that the reviewer’s personal, professional, or financial interests could influence the evaluation, the reviewer should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

  • Recommendation: Based on their evaluation, reviewers provide recommendations to the editor: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. They should provide justification for their decision and feedback to guide the authors on necessary revisions.

2. Conflict of Interest and Financial Disclosures (Specific to Reviewers)

To ensure impartiality and transparency, IJERST has strict policies regarding conflicts of interest for reviewers:

  • Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that might bias their judgment during the review process. This includes, but is not limited to, financial relationships, personal relationships, or academic competition with the authors. If a reviewer has collaborated with the authors in the past, has ongoing professional ties, or has a financial interest in the outcome of the research, they must declare it.

  • Recusal from Review: If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer should recuse themselves from the peer review process for that manuscript. If a reviewer is unsure about the existence of a conflict, they should discuss it with the editorial team.

  • Financial Disclosures: Reviewers are expected to disclose any financial interests that could be perceived as influencing their objectivity. This includes any sponsorship, grants, or payments received from organizations related to the research being reviewed.

  • Impartiality: Reviewers must remain objective and independent. They should not allow personal, professional, or financial interests to influence their evaluation of a manuscript. The integrity of the peer review process depends on unbiased, fair assessments of the work submitted.