Journal of Improvement Management

Reviewers’ Responsibilities  

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

• Confidentiality of article information must be observed in all areas. The article review process is to be done anonymously.
• Reviewers should judge articles at the appropriate time and assist the editorial team in deciding whether or not to accept the article.
• The referees' suggestions regarding the published articles should be submitted as judging forms and in the comment section for the author and editor.
• Reviewers should refrain from judging articles with conflicts of interest and report any such conflicts as soon as possible.
• Reviewers' judgments about the quality and content of articles should be based on professional and objective opinions.

 

Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere

Peer reviewers should:

• only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to conduct a proper assessment and which they can assess on time.

• respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any  details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the  journal

• not use information obtained during the peer-review process for  their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage or to  disadvantage or discredit others 

• declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from  the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a  relevant interest 

• not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a  manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs,  gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial  considerations 

• be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from  being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or  derogatory personal comments

• acknowledge that peer review is essentially a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and on time 

• provide journals with personal and professional information  that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise 

• recognize that impersonation of another individual during the  review process is considered serious misconduct 

 

---

Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Services