Preferred Reviewers of paper publications are part of the scientific group which has believed in the double-blind peer-review process. Very few papers which have passed the preliminary phase of checking plagiarism are transferred by editorial board members to preferred reviewers for in-depth review. For in-depth reviewing of articles, outside referees, as well as editorial board members, are consulted. At least 1 to 2 weeks are given to the reviewer for commenting on the article. The editorial member takes the final decision about the manuscript with a comment (by the reviewer). Paper Publications is always thankful to all reviewer members for their valuable time given to the manuscript for comment.
Reviewers Ethics
1. The double-blind peer review process is used for article reviewing, therefore reviewer or preferred reviewer should conduct the entire reviewing process anonymously. Neither Paper Publications editorial board nor staff discloses the identity of reviewers to authors. A reviewer should not disclose their identity to outsiders, authors, or any member of the board. The comment on the article made by the reviewer will be shared with the author and concerned board members of Paper Publications. Never share or discuss a manuscript sent to you with any colleagues.
2. Manuscript sent to the reviewer is a privileged communication between publisher and reviewer. Reviewers should consider it as a confidential document and therefore, respect the intellectual independence of authors. After reviewing the manuscript and sending the comment to the concerned department of the editorial office, the reviewer has to destroy all copies of the paper. The reviewer should not use any data sent by the publisher for reviewing purpose without prior permission of the authors and publisher.
3. As a Preferred Reviewer, if you believe that you are not able to judge a component of the research, or complete research, or Conflict of interest in reviewing or are sometimes unable to judge a paper impartially due to any reason, it reviewer responsibility to inform the editors as soon as possible.
4. All reviewers should timely return their reviews. In the event of delay in the review process, it is the responsibility of the reviewer to inform the editorial office. Paper Publications reserves the right to delete/ edit/modify the comments made by reviewers on articles or authors that will prevent constructive discussion.
