Reviewers Guidelines

Reviewers of Spectapro play a vital role in maintaining academic standards and publication integrity. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and professional feedback on assigned manuscripts. The following guidelines apply:

1. Confidentiality

• Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents and should not be shared or discussed with others without prior permission from the editor.

2. Objectivity and Professionalism

• Reviews must be based solely on the content and scientific merit of the manuscript, not on the authors’ identity or background.

• Feedback should be respectful and constructive, aimed at improving the manuscript’s quality.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess:

• Originality and scholarly contribution

• Relevance to the journal’s scope and aims

• Theoretical framework and literature review

• Methodology and data quality

• Logical analysis and interpretation

• Clarity of arguments and writing structure

• Language quality and writing style

• Publication ethics (e.g., plagiarism, conflicts of interest)

4. Recommendation Options

Reviewers may recommend one of the following:

• Accept without revision

• Accept with minor revision

• Major revision required

• Reject

5. Review Timeline

• Reviewers are expected to complete their assessments within 2–4 weeks of receiving the manuscript.

6. Conflict of Interest Disclosure

• Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest or prior relationships with the authors that could bias their evaluation.