Guinness Press journals follow a double-blind peer-review process. This method keeps both the reviewer and author's identities concealed from each other. This practice ensures an impartial and objective evaluation of the manuscript. We strongly encourage reviewers to adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines to ensure high-quality and unbiased review reports.

When conducting a review, reviewers are advised to consider the following key aspects of the manuscript carefully.

Ethical Consideration

1. Confidentiality

All materials provided for review are confidential. Please do not share, discuss, or disclose any part of the manuscript or its content.

2. Conflict of Interest

If you have any conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) that could affect your impartiality, please inform the editorial office immediately.

3. Timeliness

classPromptness in completing reviews is essential. If you cannot meet the deadline, please notify the editorial office immediately.

Review process

1. Initial Evaluation

Before beginning the review, please ensure the manuscript aligns with your expertise. If it does not, kindly inform the editorial office promptly.

2. Constructive Feedback

Provide specific and constructive comments that assist the authors in improving their work. Include both strengths and weaknesses.

3. Recommendation

Based on your evaluation, recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection. Please explain the rationale for your recommendation.

4. Confidential Comments to the Editor

If you have any concerns about ethical or academic aspects of the manuscript, please communicate them privately to the editorial office.

5. Respectful language

Use courteous language in your comments. Be professional and avoid any derogatory or offensive remarks

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

Evaluate if the paper provides enough detail about its methodology for the experiments to be replicable.

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

Reduced or waived publication fees for their submissions to the journal.

3. Invitation to Join Editorial Board or Advisory Panel

Consideration for a position on the journal's editorial board or advisory panel.

4. Subscription to Related Journals or Publications

Reduced or waived publication fees to other journals or publications by Guinness Press.