Guidelines for Reviewers

Guidelines for Reviewers

Peer review is a very important aspect in the publication of scholarly communications as it assists the Editor in making editorial decisions. If the submission lies outside the domain of the reviewer or the reviewer is not able to assess the submission then it must be informed to the Editor and decline to participate in the review process. Reviewers must avoid any sort of personal criticism of the author as it is considered inappropriate and must clearly express their views with possible supporting documents. In the case of any conflicts of interest resulting from any medium must be brought to the notice of the Editor. Furthermore, the suggestion of the citations to the reviewer’s work must be valid and genuine rather than having the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count. Attention must be paid by the reviewer to the ethical issues in the article and the same must be brought to the Editor’s notice for further proceedings.

Maintaining the confidentiality of the submitted research articles is one of the major duties of the reviewer. In this regard, no information concerning the paper must be shared with the authors directly or indirectly without the permission of the Editor. Usage of unpublished materials or ideas from the submission in the reviewer’s research work without any written consent from the authors is considered an ethical breach. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must read and understand the CU Journal of Non-Linear Fluid Mechanics publication ethics before reviewing the submission. Once the review invitation has been accepted, it is always recommended that the review report be submitted to the journal within the next 28 days. The reviewers must be available and ready to review the research work that they have reviewed earlier as the author's reworked papers may be sent to them for consideration.