Reviewer's Responsibilities

Peer Review Policy

Each paper is first reviewed by the editor and, if it is judged suitable for publication, it is then sent to two referees for double-blind peer review. Decisions regarding the acceptance of a manuscript for publication will be based on the Board's recommendations. Manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's Editorial Board are subjected to the same review procedure.

Contribution to Editorial Decision

The reviewers of the journal assist the editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications; the reviewers assist the authors in improving the manuscript.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels inadequately qualified to review the assigned manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat the received manuscript as confidential document. The manuscript must not be shown to, or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviewers should express their views clearly and objectively with supporting arguments. There shall be no personal criticism of the author.

Acknowledgement of Source

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement shows that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be supported by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also notify the editor if there is any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.