Reviewers

Submitting authors have the responsibilities of using their education experience and background in ensuring their manuscripts are of high academic ethical standard.

Review Process

All manuscripts received that are within the scope of our journals are sent to a reviewer in a blind peer review process.
The reviewers feedback is evaluated by Editor-in-Chief who decides whether to accept, reject the paper or authorize a rewrite and resubmission of the manuscript by the author(s).

Guidlines For Reviewers

1. Expertise
The reviewer must have fair an expertise in the field.
2. Confidentiality
The reviewer must not disclose the author's and all information contained in the manuscripts must be treated as privileged information.
3. Objectivity
The reviewer must review manuscripts objectively and clearly document their views with sound supporting arguments. If for any reason, the reviewer cannot objectively evaluate the manuscript, he must inform the Editor-in-Chief of this and excuse himself from the review.
4. Acknowledgment of Sources
Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research.
5. Handling of possible plagiarism
The reviewer must bring to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief any observed similarity between the manuscripts under review and any other published paper.
6. Promptness
All reviewers are expected to report back to the Editor in a timely manner. The reviewer must inform the Editor-in-Chief if for any reason, he is unable to complete the review in the stipulated time.