Reviewers Guidelines

Bryn Publishers journals adhere to a double blinding peer review system. This method ensures that the reviewer and the author cannot see each other’s identity as they work on the paper. This procedure makes a provision for unbiased and more objective analysis of the manuscript. We recommend our reviewers to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines to guarantee the quality and impartiality of the reports.

Candidly the following major aspects of the manuscript should be well considered while conducting a review.

Ethical Consideration 1. Confidentiality

All document that come into the reviewer’s desk are confidential. Kindly do not disclose, discuss or share any part of the manuscript or the content of the manuscript in any way possible.

2. Conflict of Interest

If you have any actual or potential conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) that may prejudice your judgement, kindly contact the editorial office.

3. Timeliness

topic One thing with class is that the reviews should be completed on time. However, if you are unable to provide materials within the deadline, you are kindly requested to contact the editorial office.

Review process 1. Initial Evaluation

As a first tip before providing the review, it is important to make sure the manuscript falls within the specialism of the reviewer. Otherwise, please let the editorial office know promptly if it does not.

2. Constructive Feedback

It is required to make concrete and helpful remarks about the manuscript for the authors to enhance their writing. Both areas of strength and area of concern should be presented.

3. Recommendation

Use your evaluation to suggest acceptance, revision, or rejection. Kindly explain why you suggest what you are suggesting.

4. Selected Private Remarks to the Editor

If you have any issues either ethical or academic regarding this manuscript, kindly and discreetly report to the editorial office.

5. Respectful language

Do not use rude words in your comments. Do not make any rude or biting comments about the other party.

Reviewers Assessment Criteria 1. Clarity and Comprehensibility

Evaluate the manuscript's clarity and comprehensibility. Suggest improvements if needed.

2. Evidence and Declarations

Verify if the manuscript includes sufficient evidence to support its claims and declarations.

3. Fair Treatment of Previous Findings

Assess whether the authors have addressed previous research findings fairly and accurately.

4. Methodology Transparency

Asses whether the paper gives sufficient information for the methodology used in each experiment to be repeated.

5. Protocols for Reproducibility

Identify any specific methods that might benefit from being published as detailed protocols online.

Reviewer Recognition 1. Recognition and Acknowledgment

A formal certificate recognizing their contribution as a reviewer.

2. Discount or Waiver on Author Fees

They gets their submissions to the journal with less or even no publication fees.

3. Call for Being on the Editorial Board or Advisory Board

Membership in the journal’s editorial board or advisory committee.

4. Subscription to Related Journals or Publications

Reduced or waived publication fees to other journals or publications by Bryn Publishers.