Reviewers Policy

Reviewers Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The process of peer review plays a crucial role in guiding editorial decisions and can also prove beneficial for the author in terms of enhancing the quality of their paper. Apart from the mentioned ethical responsibilities, reviewers are expected to treat authors and their work with the same respect and consideration that they would want for themselves. Additionally, they are advised to adhere to proper reviewing customs.

 

Promptness

If any referee chosen to assess a manuscript feels inexperienced or unable to provide a timely review, they should inform the editor and opt out of the review procedure.

 

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted for review should be regarded as confidential materials. The information should only be shared or talked about with permission from the editor and kept confidential from others.

 

Standards of Objectivity  

Reviews ought to be carried out impartially. It is not suitable to criticize the author on a personal level. It is advisable for referees to clearly present their opinions with strong supporting reasoning.

 

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers need to detect situations wherein pertinent published research mentioned in the paper has been left unacknowledged in the reference section. They need to indicate if any observations or arguments extracted from other texts are accompanied by the appropriate reference. The reviewers are required to inform the editor if there are any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript being evaluated and any other published paper that they are familiar with.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Information or concepts that have been obtained through peer review and are considered confidential should not be utilized for personal gain. It is not appropriate for reviewers to assess manuscripts that create conflicts of interest due to relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions mentioned in the papers, whether competitive or collaborative. When a person giving feedback suggests to an author to reference their own work or that of their colleagues, it should be based purely on scientific merit rather than a desire to boost their own citation count or promote themselves or their colleagues.

 

Publisher's Responsibilities

Jena Academic Press (JAP) provides practical assistance to the editor and executive editorial board of Jozac Journals, enabling them to comply with the Code of Conduct (COPE) for their specific publication:

·       the editorial decisions must be autonomous,

·       safeguard intellectual property and copyright.

Ensures that a high standard of procedure is consistently upheld in accordance with the guidelines.

 

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors:

https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

 Aligned editorial/policy guidelines with the ASSAf National Code of Best Practice in Editorial Discretion and Peer Review.

Further guidelines can be found on https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines