Reviewers' responsibilities
Contribution to editorial decisions
The review process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions, and it may also help the author improve their paper.
Promptness
If a referee is chosen and feels they are not qualified to review the manuscript or knows that a prompt review is impractical, they should inform the editor and stop the review process.
Confidentiality
The editor must approve any disclosure or discussion of manuscripts received for review as confidential documents.
Standards of objectivity
Conducting reviews objectively is necessary, and personal criticism of the author is not appropriate. Referees must clearly express their opinions and provide supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of sources
It is important for reviewers to identify cases where the reference section does not include the relevant published work cited in the paper. They should also indicate whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. The editor should be informed by reviewers of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they have personal knowledge of.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
It is important to keep any privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer-review process confidential and not use them for personal gain. It is not recommended for reviewers to consider manuscripts that have conflicts of interest because of competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.