Guidelines for Reviewers

• Reviewers should read and understand the policies of the journal. Reviewers may not accept the invitation to review a research work if they do not agree to the ethics policy of the journal or find the work submitted for review not relevant to their area of expertise.
• The review should not be handed over to any other person and Generative AI tools should not be used for generating the review.
• Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of their work. Reviewers should not attempt to identify the author of a research work submitted for review and should maintain their anonymity.
• Reviewers should communicate well with the editors and publisher. Reviewers may approach the editors if they have any queries regarding the journal and its policies.
• Reviewers should assess a work honestly, rigorously, and objectively. Use of unprofessional or subjective language should be avoided in the review report. The review report should be sent to the editor within a reasonable time frame from the receipt of the research work for review.
• While reviewing the work, specifically the articles, following parameters may be evaluated:
  • Does the submission clearly define the research questions?
  • Have the authors attempted to fill a research gap and have communicated it clearly through their work?
  • Is the methodology employed sound and appropriate to answer the questions posed?
  • Have the results been presented in an accessible form?
  • Is there an adequate discussion of the results and a concluding section that follows from the article’s findings?

         Reviewers should be ready to review the research work they reviewed earlier. The reviewers may 
         suggest changes and report any ethical misconduct to the editors. The authors’ reworked papers
         may be sent to them for reconsideration.