I. The Role of Reviewer
Reviewers evaluate article submissions to WJST based on the requirements of the journal, predefined criteria, and the quality, completeness and accuracy of the research presented. They provide feedback on the paper, suggest improvements and make a recommendation to the editor about whether to accept, reject or request changes to the article. The ultimate decision always rests with the editor but reviewers play a significant role in determining the outcome.
II. Volunteer to reviewer
Reviewers are usually asked to provide a review by a journal editor. Researcher whose is expert in the same field of submitted manuscript is typically chosen by editors. You are welcome to review, nevertheless, if you believe you would make a valuable referee for the Werabe Journal of Science and Technology (WJST). Please be aware that you must register, complete your profile on the journal's homepage, and wait for the editors' approval.
Please note that submission the request does not guarantee that you will be contacted to review. By completing this form and agreeing to join the WJST reviewer’s list, you give us permission to share your contact information with our journal editors for the purpose of contacting you with review requests.
III.Invited reviewer
Invited reviewers are selected based on their expertise and reputation in the same field of submitted manuscript. Then, the editor sent an invitation mail containing the title and abstract of the manuscript.
Preconditions to accept or reject invitations
Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, consider the following questions:
Does the article match your area of expertise?
Only accept 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 time? Reviewing can be a lot of work; before you commit, make sure you can meet the deadline.
Do you need to find out more about
reviewing and the peer review process? Check the peer-review process in the “For Author”
section and the review criteria checklists appended to the system.
How to conduct a review
After accepting the invitation to review, you are supposed to register in the journal's online peer-review system and access all submission files. Reviewing is a time-intensive process—writing a review report can be almost as much work as writing a manuscript!—but it is very worthwhile for the reviewer as well as for the community. Reviewers:
Ensure the rigorous standards of the scientific process by taking part in the peer-review system.
Maintain the integrity of the journal by identifying invalid research and helping to maintain its quality.
Fulfill a sense of obligation to the community and their own area of research.
Establish relationships with reputable colleagues and their affiliated journals, and increase their opportunities to join an Editorial Board.
And help prevent ethical breaches by identifying plagiarism, research fraud, and other problems because of their familiarity with the subject area.
/p>
And help prevent ethical breaches by identifying plagiarism, research fraud, and other problems because of their familiarity with the subject area.
Demonstrate professional courtesy, as authors and reviewers are often interchangeable roles; as reviewers, researchers "repay" the same consideration they receive as authors.
Finally, structuring your review is required. Your review will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. It will also aid the author and allow them to improve their manuscript. I this line your review report will be separately addressed to the Editor and Author in the journal pee-review system.
IV. Review criteria
To be accepted for publication in Werabe Journal of Science and Technology (WJST), research articles must satisfy the following criteria:
The study presents a clear research gaps and appropriate objectives.
The results reported have not been published elsewhere.
Experiments, statistics, and other analyses are performed to a high technical standard and are described in sufficient detail.
Conclusions are presented in an appropriate fashion and are supported by the data.
The article is presented in an intelligible fashion and is written in Standard English.
The research meets all applicable standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity.
The article adheres to appropriate reporting guidelines and community standards for data availability.
Therefore, your evaluation of this submission and your recommendation to the Associate Editor should focus on the scientific soundness of the work. Concerns that the work is lacking in novelty, impact, or interest should not be taken into account.
V.Confidentiality
Manuscripts under peer review should be strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share manuscripts or discuss their content with anyone outside the peer review process. Reviewers may, on request, consult with colleagues from their research group trusting that the confidentiality of the manuscript is maintained. Reviewers should first contact WJST or the Associate Editor handling the manuscript and note the name of the colleague(s) in the ‘Comments to the editor’ section of their report.Reviewers will be anonymous to the authors.
VI.Recognizing reviewers
WJST acknowledges reviewers’ invaluable contribution to the progress of science. The time, energy and expertise that referees contribute to validating the work of their peers are vital to the advancement of the academic community. Therefore, WJST will provide a digitally signed certificate to the reviewer upon the submission of the review report in the system.