Responsibilities of Reviewers

Purpose and Importance of Peer Review

Peer review assists editors in making publication decisions and, through communication with authors, contributes to the improvement of manuscripts. JSSAL views peer review as a fundamental component of the scientific process and believes that all scholars have a responsibility to contribute fairly to this process.

Reviewer Qualifications and Participation

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation. This allows alternative reviewers to be contacted in a timely manner.

Confidentiality Principles

Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This rule also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Objectivity and Constructive Criticism

Reviews should be conducted objectively, with observations clearly formulated and supported by arguments to help authors improve their manuscripts. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Source Verification and Originality

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Conflict of Interest

Any invited reviewer who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions related to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors, declare their conflicts of interest, and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Use of Confidential Information

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This rule also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the timeframe specified by the editorial team (typically 4-6 weeks) to ensure timely publication processes.

For more details, see our Publication Policy.