All peer reviewers must follow these ethical guidelines for journal articles in review:
- Reviewers must give unbiased consideration to each manuscript submitted. They should judge each on its merits, without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
- Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript. This includes any relationship with the author that may bias their review.
- Reviewers must keep the peer review process confidential. They must not share information or correspondence about a manuscript with anyone outside of the peer-review process.
- Reviewers should provide a constructive, comprehensive, evidenced, and appropriately substantial peer review report.
- Reviewers must avoid making statements in their report which might be construed as impugning any person’s reputation.
- Reviewers should make all reasonable effort to submit their report and recommendation on time. They should inform the editor if this is not possible.
- Reviewers should call to the journal editor’s attention any significant similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or submitted manuscripts of which they are aware.
Reviewers should decline the invitation to review if they have a competing interest/conflict of interest with the submission. Examples include, but are not limited to:
- Holding a position in the same institution as the authors
- Seeking employment at the same institution as the authors
- Have ownership in equity or enterprise that would benefit from the publication
- Would directly/indirectly receive income as a result of the publication
- The author is a family member, professional/business partner, or former PhD student
- The author is a collaborator in the past 48 months
- The author is co-editor in the past 24 months
Reviewers should report a competing interest/conflict of interest if a reasonable person with all relevant facts would question their impartiality.