Reviewers are expected to:
➼ Evaluate manuscripts objectively and fairly
➼ Assess originality, relevance, and academic quality
➼ Provide constructive and clear feedback
➼ Support authors in improving their work
Manuscripts are reviewed based on:
➼ Relevance to journal scope
➼ Originality and contribution to the field
➼ Methodology and technical accuracy
➼ Clarity of presentation and structure
➼ Validity of results and conclusions
➼ All manuscripts are strictly confidential
➼ Reviewers must not share, copy, or use content for personal benefit
Manuscript data must not be discussed with others
➼ Reviews must be unbiased and evidence-based
➼ Personal criticism of authors is not acceptable
➼ Decisions should be based only on academic merit
Reviewers must decline review if:
➼ There is a personal, academic, or financial conflict
➼ The manuscript is closely related to their own work
Objectivity cannot be ensured
➼ Reviews should be completed within the assigned timeframe
➼ If unable to review on time, reviewers must inform the editorial team
Reviewers should report:
➼ Plagiarism or duplicate publication
➼ Data fabrication or falsification
➼ Ethical concerns related to research practices
Reviewers may recommend:
➼ Accept without revision
‣ Minor revision
‣ Major revision
‣ Reject
➼ Final decisions are made by the editorial board.
GIRJ values the contribution of reviewers and acknowledges their role in maintaining high academic standards.
For reviewer-related queries:
Email: editorial@girj.org