Reviewer Guidelines
First: Registering as a Journal Reviewer
Application Requirements for the Editorial Board:
- Must hold a Ph.D. with at least an Associate Professor or Assistant Professor title in the journal's offered specialties and have experience reviewing at least ten papers in peer-reviewed journals.
- Must be able to provide scientific feedback, opinions, and critiques accurately.
- Must adhere to the journal's privacy policy and be fully knowledgeable about scientific peer review standards and the journal's specific requirements.
To Register as a Reviewer for the Journal:
- Create an account on the following journal website: [https://gjmsr.eventsgate.org/gjmsr/user/register]
- Ensure all the following information is complete in both Arabic and English:
- Full name (in both Arabic and English).
- Name of the university and country currently affiliated with or working in (mentioned as affiliation on the site).
- Peer review interests (topics of interest for sending papers for review - at least 3).
- CV (the reviewer should only mention their full name, academic title, country, university, the number and titles of published papers in both Arabic and English, the number and titles of papers reviewed by them in both Arabic and English, indicate the ability to review in English if available, and mention only important and relevant memberships concerning journals and related institutions. No need to mention attended conferences and workshops).
- A link to a personal profile showing academic work (this can be a ResearchGate, ORCID, Google Scholar account, or any similar account showing academic work).
- After completing the information thoroughly, contact the journal management to activate the account and start receiving papers for review.
Note: Please note that any lack of the above information will prevent the system from issuing a review certificate for the reviewer. The above information should be added by logging into the account, clicking on the icon, and selecting "Edit Profile."
Reviewer Duties:
- Carefully examine the research paper and ensure it is organized according to the publication instructions.
- Ensure that the essential elements of the research are complete as specified in the approved template.
- Verify the soundness of the methodology, correctness of conclusions, results, and recommendations.
- Perform linguistic proofreading according to the publication standards of research papers, especially grammar and punctuation.
- Provide the author with suggestions that help improve the research paper in a review file, which contains notes and suggestions from the reviewer for the author to benefit from, even in case of paper rejection.
Reviewer Benefits in the Journal:
- Receive an endorsement from the journal confirming their role as a reviewer.
- Benefit from free publication in the journal after obtaining qualifying points by registering colleagues and publishing their research in the journal according to the standards set by the journal's management. (For inquiries about free publication, contact the journal management).
- Enhance knowledge by accessing the latest research work in their field.
- Opportunity to offer workshops and courses in the journal, increasing the audience of researchers in the same specialty.
- Opportunity to join the advisory board and the editorial board of the journal.
Second: For Reviewers Already Registered with the Journal
Before Accepting or Declining a Review Invitation, Consider the Following:
- Does the article match your area of expertise? Accept only if you feel you can provide a high-quality review.
- Do you have a potential conflict of interest? Disclose this to the editor when you respond.
- Do you have enough time? Reviewing can be time-consuming - ensure you can meet the deadline before committing.
How to Peer Review for GJMSR:
- A reviewer’s report should comprehensively critique the submission and consist of more than a few brief sentences. GJMSR does not require a specific report structure, but a suggested format includes:
- Summary
- Major Issues
- Minor Issues
- Reviewers are encouraged to help authors improve their manuscripts. The report should provide constructive analysis for the authors, particularly when revisions are recommended. If reviewers wish to keep certain comments confidential, they can add them to the "comments to the editor" section.
- While expectations vary by discipline, some key aspects that reviewers should critique include:
- Are the research questions valid?
- Is the sample size adequate?
- Are necessary ethical approvals and consents obtained, and is the research ethical?
- Are the methods and study design appropriate to answer the research question?
- Do the experiments have appropriate controls?
- Is the reporting of methods, including any equipment and materials, detailed enough to allow replication?
- Were appropriate statistical tests used and reported correctly?
- Are the figures and tables clear and accurately representing the results?
- Have previous research by the authors and others been discussed, and how do these results compare to current findings?
- Are there any inappropriate citations, such as not supporting the claim made or too many self-citations?
- Do the results support the conclusions?
- Are the research limitations acknowledged?
- Is the abstract a clear summary of the research and results, without bias?
- Is the language clear and understandable?
- To help authors receive timely reviews, reviewers should submit their reports via the manuscript tracking system by or before the agreed deadline. Reviewers should contact GJMSR if they cannot meet the deadline so an alternative date can be arranged.
- Reviewers are encouraged to focus their reports on objective criticism of the scientific aspects of the submission, including the integrity of the methodology and whether conclusions are supported by the results. Comments on the novelty and potential impact of the work can also be provided. At the end of the review, we ask reviewers to recommend one of the following actions:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
- Unable to Review
Confidentiality:
- Manuscripts under review must be treated as highly confidential. Reviewers should not share manuscripts or discuss their content with anyone outside the peer review process.
- Reviewers may, upon request, consult with colleagues from their research group, provided the confidentiality of the manuscript is maintained. Reviewers should first contact GJMSR or the editor-in-chief and note the colleague's name(s) in the "comments to the editor" section of their report.
Conflict of Interest:
- Reviewers must decline to review a submission when:
- They have a financial interest in the subject matter.
- They have previously discussed the manuscript with the authors.
- They feel unable to be objective.
Review Requests:
- We appreciate requests to join our peer reviewer community. Our editorial board selects reviewers on a per-manuscript basis. They invite the most suitable scholars from their field and/or publication list in each case. To ensure we have your contact details updated, interested reviewers should register for a user account.
