Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers are expected to assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications during the open review process with the author. The author can make use of the open review process to improve the standard of his paper.

Qualification of Reviewers

If a person entrusted with the review work of a particular paper feels that he is incapable of reviewing that matter or if he feels that the subject area is beyond his expertise, he should inform the editor and excuse himself from the review process. The editorial board should entrust another competent reviewer to complete the work. The board should take the responsibility of completing the review in time.

Promptness

Authors will normally receive feedback about the acceptance of his/her paper for the reviewing process within three weeks and in another three weeks (s)he will normally receive the first response from the reviewers. The editorial board is responsible for ensuring the promptness of responses in the open review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review in the open review process are subjected to the criteria of enhancing their rationality and analytical skill through the mutual rational controls of critical discussion.

Establishing Standards of Objectivity through Critical Discussion

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Authors are encouraged to make explicit the internal criteria they use to evaluate the validity of their contributions to knowledge. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in the spirit of enhancing the quality of the paper through the mutual rational controls of critical discussion.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. References to the ideas of others should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor and bring to his attention if any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Information or ideas obtained through peer review must only be used with the explicit agreement of the participants in the peer review. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.