Journal of Applied Sciences and Nanotechnology

ِAbout The Journal

Aims and Scope

Journal Metrics

Indexing and Abstracting

Editorial Board

Editorial Staff

Publication Ethics

Privacy Policy

Terms and Conditions

Revenue Sources

Related Links

Current Issue

Early View Articles

Browse by Issue

Browse by Author

Browse by Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

Author Rights

Guide for Authors

Authorship Guidelines

Copyright and Access

Conflict of Interests

Peer-Review Process

Article Structure

Plagiarism Prevention and Violation

Research Data

Reviewer Login

Guide for Reviewers

Reviewer Recognition

Peer-Review Policy

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Submit a Manuscript

Track a Manuscript

FAQ

Glossary of Terms

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

The Journal of Applied Science and Nanotechnology (JASN) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity in peer review. Peer reviewers are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

  1. Confidentiality: Reviewers should keep all information regarding the manuscript confidential and should not discuss the research with anyone not directly involved in the review process.

  2. Impartiality: Reviews should be conducted objectively, without any personal bias towards the author(s). Any personal, professional, or financial relationships that might be perceived as potentially biasing the reviewer should be declared, and the reviewer should recuse themselves if such conflicts exist.

  3. Timeliness: Reviewers should only agree to review a manuscript if they can commit to doing so in a timely manner. If a reviewer finds they cannot complete the review within the designated period, they should inform the editorial office as soon as possible.

  4. Competence: Reviewers should only accept invitations to review work that is within their area of expertise. If they feel unqualified or unable to review the research, they should inform the editors immediately and, if possible, suggest alternative reviewers.

  5. Constructive Criticism: Feedback should be constructive, professional, and respectful. Reviewers should clearly explain and support their judgments in such a way that editors and authors can understand the basis of their comments.

  6. Integrity: Reviewers should not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.

  7. Detection of Misconduct: Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical issues in the manuscript and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they are aware.

By agreeing to review a manuscript, reviewers accept these responsibilities, which are integral to the scholarly publishing process. The adherence to these guidelines ensures the integrity, validity, and quality of the papers published by JASN.