Reviewers Page

Reviewing a manuscript written by a fellow scientist is a privilege. However, it is a time-consuming
responsibility. Hence, JSLIS' Editorial Board, authors, and audiences appreciate your willingness
to accept this responsibility and your dedication. JSLIS adheres to a single-blind peer-review
process that is rapid and fair, and also ensures a high quality of articles published. In so doing,
JSLIS needs reviewers who can provide insightful and helpful comments on submitted manuscripts
within 6-8 weeks after the time they accepted to review. Maintaining JSLIS as a scientific journal
of high quality depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to be objective,
fair, and insightful in their evaluation of manuscripts.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

If you have been invited by JSLIS 's Editor-in-Chief to review a manuscript, please consider the following:
1. Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the
manuscript to help authors improve their works

2. Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary

3. Providing all required information within established deadlines

4. Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication
in the journal

5. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content
of a manuscript they are asked to review

6. Reporting possible research misconducts

7. Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons

8. Treating the manuscript as a confidential document

9. Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript

10. Not communicating directly with authors

11. Not identifying themselves to authors

12. Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer

13. Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work

14. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any
other publication to his/her knowledge

15. Writing review report in English only

What Should Be Checked While Reviewing a Manuscript?

1. Novelty
2. Originality
3. Scientific reliability
4. Valuable contribution to the science
5. Adding new aspects to the existed field of study
6. Ethical aspects
7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
8. References provided to substantiate the content
9. Grammar, punctuation and spelling
10. Scientific misconduct