This guide outlines the ethical responsibilities our reviewers must adhere to and the expectations for the journal’s peer-review process. Our processes are based on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) “Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers”.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
1 · Contribution to editorial decisionsPeer review assists the editor in making publication decisions and gives the author an important opportunity to improve the manuscript.
2 · ConfidentialityAll manuscripts sent for review are confidential documents. To protect authors’ rights and the integrity of double-blind review, manuscripts must not be uploaded to or processed by any artificial intelligence tools, online platforms, or third-party software, nor shared through such means.
3 · Impartiality and objectivityReviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and constructively, with supporting arguments.
4 · PunctualityA reviewer who accepts an invitation should complete the review within the agreed timeframe. A reviewer who anticipates a delay should inform the editor immediately.
5 · Conflict of interestReviewers should immediately notify the editor and decline the assignment if they identify any conflict of interest (competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with an author or institution) related to the manuscript.
6 · Acknowledgment of sourcesReviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited, and check whether an observation or argument made by the author has been previously reported elsewhere.
The Review Process and Criteria
We kindly ask our reviewers to focus on the following key questions in their evaluation:
1Originality and novelty
Does the work provide a new and significant contribution to the literature?
2Methodology
Are the methods valid, reliable, and appropriate for the research objective?
3Results and interpretation
Are the results supported by the data, and are the interpretations logical?
4Structure and readability
Is the manuscript well organised, and is the language clear and understandable?
5Command of literature
Has the author cited relevant and current literature?
Reviewer Incentive Policy
In recognition of their contribution, reviewers receive the following fee benefits for one article:
After 5 completed reviews50% offDiscount on all fees (editorial processing and publication) for one article.
After 10 completed reviewsFreeExemption from all fees (editorial processing and publication) for one article.
Completed reviews are verified from DergiPark records. Fee waivers have no influence on editorial decisions.
Join Our Reviewer Database
If you would like to contribute to the latest research in your field of expertise by joining our reviewer database, please send us your CV.
✉ info@romayajournal.com
