Reviewers Guidelines

Reviewers Guidelines

Peer-Review

Integrity Research Journals is an open access academic publisher that is position to make a different in academic community. Integrity Research Journals considered peer review of submitted manuscript as the backbone of it operation and only qualified and experienced researchers and academicians are selected to undertake this task. Manuscripts submitted to Integrity Research Journals are peer-reviewed. The Reviewers made comment on the submitted manuscript which helps the Handling Editor in making final decision on the manuscript.

We at Integrity Research Journals sincerely invite qualified and experience researchers/academicians to join our peer-review group. By participating, you will provide help to authors with your ideas and valuable suggestions that will improve their papers quality. In so doing, you are exposed to the latest research findings and increase your experience. In recognition of your contribution to the journal, an attestation letter will be sent to you on request and your name will be included as Reviewer or Editorial Board Member in our database. Also, a considerable partial waiver will be given to you anytime you publish with us.

 

Criteria for Reviewers

 

Researchers or academicians who desire to serve as Reviewers for Integrity Research Journals should must:

  • poses a doctorate degree from a recognize higher institution of learning

  • have a teaching and research experience of not less than 5 years

  • have published not less than 5 research articles in reputable and related journals

  • have acted as a reviewer for other related journals

  • have adequate knowledge of the scope of the journal

  • be willing to render voluntary services without remuneration

Interested researchers/academicians should forward their recent CV, including tittles of all their publications to editorialboard@integrityresjournals.org for evaluation.

 

Code of Conduct for Reviewers

Peer review plays an important role in ensuring the integrity of Academic Research. Peer reviewers play a central and critical part in the peer-review process, but too often come to the role without any guidance and may be unaware of their ethical obligations. The COPE Ethical Guidelines for peer reviewers set out the basic principles and standards to which all peer reviewers should adhere to during the peer-review process. Some of the Ethical Guidelines are summarized below.

Peer reviewers should:

  • only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and declare if they do not have the subject expertise required to carry out the review.

  • respond in a reasonable time-frame, especially if they cannot do the review, and without intentional delay. Only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension.

  • respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.

  • not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.

  • declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.

  • review afresh any manuscript they have previously reviewed for another journal as it may have changed between the two submissions and the journals’ criteria for evaluation and acceptance may be different.

  • not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.

  • be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.

  • decline to review if they have been involved with any of the work in the manuscript or its reporting.

  • decline to review if asked to review a manuscript that is very similar to one they have in preparation or under consideration at another journal.

  • acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner.

  • provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.

  • recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.

  • read the manuscript, ancillary material (e.g. reviewer instructions, required ethics and policy statements, supplemental data files) and journal instructions thoroughly, getting back to the journal if anything is not clear and requesting any missing or incomplete items they need to carry out a full review.

  • not involve anyone else in the review of a manuscript, including junior researchers they are mentoring, without first obtaining permission from the journal; the names of any individuals who have helped them with the review should be included with the returned review so that they are associated with the manuscript in the journal’s records and can also receive due credit for their efforts.

 

Reviewers' Aprrociation

The management of Integrity Research Journal sincerely appreciate the voluntary contribution that each reviewer makes to the journals, helping us to maintain thier high standard. Your evaluations have been of tremendous help to the authors and journals as well. Thank you for your participation in the review process and sincerely appreciate your time and the effort you have devoted in reviewing manuscripts for Integrity Research Journals.