Reviewer Guidelines

Before Accepting or Declining a Review Invitation

Before accepting or declining an invitation to review, reviewers should consider the following questions:

  • Does the manuscript match your area of expertise? Accept the invitation only if you can provide a high-quality review.
  • Do you have any potential conflict of interest? If so, disclose this to the editor when responding to the invitation.
  • Do you have enough time? Reviewing can require considerable effort; therefore, reviewers should ensure that they can meet the agreed deadline before accepting the invitation.

How to Peer Review for DJES

The reviewer report should provide a comprehensive and constructive critique of the submission and should consist of more than a few brief sentences. DJES does not require a specific structure for reviewer reports; however, the following format is recommended:

  • Summary
  • Major issues
  • Minor issues
  • Recommendation

DJES encourages reviewers to help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewer reports should provide constructive analysis, particularly where revisions are recommended. Comments intended only for the editor should be added to the confidential comments section addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.

While expectations may vary by discipline, reviewers are encouraged to consider the following core aspects:

  • Are the research questions valid and clearly stated?
  • Is the sample size or dataset sufficient, where applicable?
  • Is ethical approval and/or informed consent necessary, and if so, has it been obtained?
  • Are the methods and study design appropriate for answering the research question?
  • Do the experiments have appropriate controls, where applicable?
  • Is the reporting of the methods, equipment, materials, software, or datasets sufficiently detailed to allow reproducibility?
  • Are any statistical tests used appropriate and correctly reported?
  • Are the figures and tables clear, necessary, and representative of the results?
  • Has previous research by the authors and others been discussed, and have the current results been compared with relevant published work?
  • Are there any inappropriate citations, such as citations that do not support the stated claim or excessive citation of the authors’ own work?
  • Do the results support the conclusions?
  • Are the limitations of the research acknowledged?
  • Is the abstract an accurate summary of the research and results without overstatement?
  • Is the language clear and understandable?

To help authors receive timely reviews, reviewer reports should be submitted through the manuscript tracking system on or before the agreed deadline. Reviewers should contact DJES if they are unable to meet the deadline so that an alternative date can be arranged.

Reviewers should focus their reports on objectively evaluating the scientific aspects of the submission, including the soundness of the methodology and whether the conclusions are supported by the results. Comments may also be provided on the novelty, clarity, relevance, and potential impact of the work.

At the end of the review, reviewers are asked to recommend one of the following actions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under peer review must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share manuscripts or discuss their content with anyone outside the peer-review process.

Reviewers may consult colleagues from their research group only with prior permission from DJES or the Editor-in-Chief, provided that the confidentiality of the manuscript is maintained. The names of any consulted colleague(s) should be disclosed in the “Comments to the Editor” section of the reviewer report.

Reviewers must not use the unpublished content of a manuscript for personal advantage or share it with third parties. Reviewers should also avoid uploading manuscript content, figures, tables, or data to any external tool or platform that may compromise confidentiality.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should decline to review a submission when they:

  • Have a financial interest in the subject of the work.
  • Have previously discussed the manuscript with the authors.
  • Have recent or ongoing collaboration, competition, or personal relationships with the authors.
  • Are affiliated with the same institution as any of the authors.
  • Feel unable to provide an objective and unbiased review.

Any potential conflict of interest should be disclosed to the Editor-in-Chief before accepting the review invitation.

Applications to Review

DJES welcomes applications from qualified researchers who wish to join its community of peer reviewers. The Editorial Board selects reviewers on a manuscript-by-manuscript basis, according to the relevance of the reviewer’s expertise, publication record, and the subject area of the submitted manuscript. Interested reviewers are encouraged to register for a user account and keep their contact details, affiliation, and areas of expertise up to date.

```