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