Peer review is a vital component of our publication process and is integral to upholding JEI’s unwavering commitment to publishing superior-quality papers. Our team of experts conducts a thorough and rigorous peer-review process for all manuscripts submitted to our journals. Our Managing Editor performs a technical pre-check of the manuscript upon submission, and our academic editors are invited to conduct an editorial pre-check and recommend reviewers. Our editorial office efficiently manages the peer-review process, which is completed by independent experts who submit at least two review reports per manuscript. Our authors receive ample revisions before our esteemed academic editors ultimately make a final decision. We at JEI value our reviewers and offer several benefits, including discounts on future submissions and the opportunity to be promoted to our reviewer board or Topical Advisory Panel. Our evaluation of each manuscript is professionally and ethically conducted in every facet of our review process.
Reviewers’ Profile and Responsibilities
The reviewer plays a crucial role and carries a significant responsibility in upholding the integrity of the scholarly record. It is expected of every reviewer to conduct manuscript evaluation promptly, transparently, and ethically, abiding by the COPE guidelines.
To be eligible as a reviewer, one must:
- Have no conflicts of interest with the authors
- Not belong to the same institution as the authors
- Not have co-published with the authors within the past three years
- Hold a PhD
- Possess relevant experience and a proven publication record in the field of the submitted paper (Scopus, ORCID)
- Be experienced scholars in the field of the submitted paper
- Hold an official and recognized academic affiliation.
At JEI, we value a rigorous peer review to ensure a thorough evaluation of every manuscript. This is a vital responsibility for our reviewers. If you agree to review a manuscript, we expect you to:
- Possess the necessary expertise to assess the scientific quality of the manuscript
- Provide high-quality review reports and remain responsive throughout the peer review process
- Maintain high standards of professionalism and ethics.
Reviewers’ Benefits
As a crucial but often unseen and unrewarded task, reviewing deserves recognition. At JEI, we strive to show our appreciation for all reviewers. Here are just a few of the benefits that come with reviewing:
- Receive a discount voucher code for each manuscript reviewed, which can be applied toward a reduction in your article processing charge (APC) for a future submission to JEI
- Use your voucher codes to pay for professional English editing services through Author Services
- Receive a personalized reviewer certificate and have the opportunity to be considered for an Outstanding Reviewer Award
- Be included in the journal’s annual acknowledgment of reviewers
- Potentially be promoted to Reviewer Board Member status (subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief)
Reviewer Board
The Reviewer Board (RB) comprises experienced researchers whose responsibility is to deliver thorough, rigorous, and transparent review reports for manuscripts within their area of expertise. The initial term is for one year with the possibility of renewal or termination. Membership includes the same responsibilities and benefits as regular reviewers, in addition to the following:
- RB Members must review a minimum of six manuscripts per year. In the event that a member cannot provide a report, they are expected to suggest potential reviewers who meet the requirements
- RB Members will receive a certificate.
- RB Members will be announced on the journal’s website.
- Active RB members can be considered for the Topical Advisory Panel upon approval by the Editor-in-Chief.
Review Reports
The review report should be prepared in English. Please carefully consider the following guidelines:
- Read the article and any supplementary materials, paying close attention to figures, tables, data, and methods.
- Your report should critically analyze the article as a whole and specific sections, as well as key concepts presented in the article.
- Please provide detailed comments, so the authors may understand and address the points you raise.
- Unnecessary self-citations, or honorary citations should not be recommended.
- References can be provided to improve manuscript quality.
- Maintain a neutral tone and provide constructive criticism to help improve the authors’ work.
- Use of AI or AI-assisted tools to review submissions or generate reports constitutes a breach of peer review confidentiality and is not allowed.
Review reports should contain the following:
Review reports are expected to encompass the following components:
- Summary: A succinct paragraph delineating the paper’s objective, primary contributions, and strengths.
- General Concept Comments:
– Article Evaluation: Addressing weaknesses, hypothesis testability, methodological inaccuracies, and missing controls, among other relevant aspects.
-Review Assessment: Evaluating the completeness and relevance of the reviewed topic, identification of knowledge gaps, appropriateness of references, and other pertinent considerations. - Specific Comments: Referencing line numbers, tables, or figures to pinpoint inaccuracies or unclear statements within the manuscript.
All remarks should focus exclusively on the scientific content, furnishing authors with detailed insights to facilitate their response.