The criteria for peer reviewers to consider during their evaluation are,
- The study presents the results of original research.
- The research meets all applicable standards of ethics and research integrity (duplication, manipulation of data, plagiarism etc.).
- The paper should represent statistical accuracy and validity of the methods adopted in studying the problem (if required, reviewers can contact the editor to obtain the primary data from the authors).
- Results reported have not been published elsewhere.
- Presence of conceptual advancement over previously published work.
- Potential significance of the work with respect to the present and future.
- Article should not indicate any redundancy.
The purpose of peer review is to provide editors with an expert opinion regarding the quality of the manuscript under consideration. The review should also supply authors with explicit feedback on how to improve their papers so that they are acceptable for publication in Engineering and Scientific International Journal.
As a reviewer, please remember to do the following while writing your review report,
- Provide your opinion on the quality of the article ad indicate the areas of concern.
- Suggest the author on how to improve the quality of the article.
- Suggest any alternate hypothesis or understanding of the results obtained.
- Summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the paper.
- If the article is worthy of rejection, you should indicate the grounds on which the decision is taken. As reviewers, you are allowed to be very critical on the article presented, but at the same time you must avoid any personalized remarks which may be viewed as biased or with ulterior motive.
The predefined review form has provision for reviewers to provide their comments to editor as well as blind comments to the author.
Reviewers can also provide additional comments on a word or PDF file. Alternately, they can also provide their comments and suggestions on the manuscript file directly, although this is not advisable.
The review process is strictly confidential and should be treated as such by reviewers. Reviewers must not take any confidential information they have gained in the review process and use it before the paper is published. Even after publication, unless they have the permission of the authors to use other information, reviewers may only use publicly published data and not information from any earlier drafts.
Since we follow the double blind system of peer reviewing, the following measures are to be taken by reviewers before submitting their attachments:
- Reviewers should remove any information that reveals the originator’s identity.
- Authors and Reviewers should not send any attachments via e-mail.
These guidelines are adapted from the PLoS ONE website (http://www.plosone.org), published under the Creative Commons Attribution License.