For Reviewers
Reviewer reports help editors assess the quality, relevance and integrity of scholarly work. EJSIR expects reviews to be independent, evidence-based, confidential and respectful.
Before accepting an invitation
Accept only when the manuscript is within your expertise and you can provide a careful report by the requested date. Tell the editor promptly if you have a relevant personal, professional, financial, academic or institutional conflict. Decline if a conflict could impair impartial assessment or if the manuscript requires expertise you do not have.
Assess the work
- Evaluate fit with the journal’s aims, scope and selected academic section.
- Assess whether the research question, methods, analysis and evidence support the conclusions.
- Check that important limitations, uncertainty, ethics and data availability are addressed where relevant.
- Consider whether the manuscript engages fairly with relevant prior research.
- Identify essential revisions separately from optional improvements.
Write a constructive report
Explain the reason for each major concern and, where possible, point to the specific analysis, passage or evidence involved. Focus on scholarly content rather than the author. Do not ask authors to cite your work unless it is directly relevant, and do not make recommendations based on personal preference alone.
Confidentiality and responsible tool use
Manuscripts, data, supplementary files and editorial correspondence are confidential. Do not share unpublished work or use it for personal or competitive advantage. Do not upload confidential manuscript content to external tools that may retain or expose it. Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy and confidentiality of their reports.
Recommendations and decisions
A recommendation informs but does not replace the editor’s decision. Editors consider the reviewer reports, journal scope, research integrity, author responses and the complete scholarly record. The stated model is double-anonymous peer review, normally with at least two independent reviewers; additional expertise may be sought where needed.