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.