Ethical standards for arbitrators

For integrity and objectivity:

Reviewers must evaluate research objectively and without any personal bias or prejudice based on research funding sources or authors' names.

Confidentiality:
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the research they review and not disclose the content or any part of it to anyone else.

Anonymity:
Reviewers must not disclose their identity to the authors or any other person, unless specifically requested to do so by the editorial board.

No conflict of interest:
Reviewers must avoid participating in the review of research that may create a conflict of interest, such as research written by colleagues or friends, or research that conflicts with their personal interests.

Adherence to deadlines:
Reviewers must adhere to the deadlines set for submitting their evaluations.

Providing constructive feedback:
Reviewers must provide clear, detailed, and objective feedback, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of the research.

Adherence to review standards:
Reviewers must adhere to the review standards established by the journal, which may include evaluating the originality, quality, methodology, and scientific message of the research. Adherence to Instructions:

Reviewers must follow the instructions provided by the journal, which may include using a specific evaluation form or submitting feedback in a particular format.

Respect for Intellectual Property:
Reviewers must ensure that the research they review does not contain any form of plagiarism or theft.

Compliance with Publication Guidelines:
Reviewers must ensure that the research they review adheres to the publication guidelines established by the journal.