Reviewer Guidelines

The Journal of Sustainable Futures and Interdisciplinary Solutions (JSFIS) relies on the expertise and dedication of reviewers to maintain the quality and integrity of its publications. Reviewers play a critical role in ensuring that manuscripts meet the journal’s standards of originality, rigor, and relevance.

 

Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality:
  • Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.
  • Do not share or discuss the manuscript with anyone outside the review process.
  1. Objective Evaluation:
  • Provide unbiased, constructive, and respectful feedback.
  • Avoid personal criticism and focus solely on the content of the manuscript.
  1. Timeliness:
  • Complete the review within the agreed timeframe (typically 2–3 weeks).
  • Notify the editorial team promptly if additional time is required or if you are unable to review the manuscript.
  1. Identify Ethical Concerns:
  • Report any suspected ethical issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest.
  • Notify the editorial team if the manuscript contains content that closely resembles published work without proper citation.
  1. Conflicts of Interest:
  • Decline to review manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists, such as competitive, collaborative, or financial relationships with the authors.

 

Key Areas of Evaluation

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  1. Originality and Innovation:
  • Does the manuscript present new ideas, methods, or findings?
  • Is the work a significant contribution to the field?
  1. Relevance to the Journal’s Scope:
  • Does the manuscript align with the journal’s focus on sustainability and interdisciplinary solutions?
  1. Methodological Rigor:
  • Are the research methods robust and clearly described?
  • Are the results valid, reliable, and well-supported by data?
  1. Clarity and Presentation:
  • Is the manuscript well-structured and easy to understand?
  • Are tables, figures, and references appropriately used and formatted?
  1. Significance and Impact:
  • Does the research address important issues or challenges in sustainability?
  • Are the conclusions supported by the data and analysis?

 

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers are asked to provide one of the following recommendations:

  1. Accept without revision: The manuscript is suitable for publication as it is.
  2. Minor revisions required: The manuscript needs small adjustments to improve clarity or accuracy.
  3. Major revisions required: Substantial improvements are needed in methodology, analysis, or presentation.
  4. Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or falls outside its scope.

 

Providing Feedback

  • Constructive Comments: Offer detailed, specific, and actionable feedback to help authors improve their manuscript.
  • Balanced Feedback: Highlight both strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript.
  • Professional Tone: Use respectful and professional language in all comments.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

  1. Impartiality: Evaluate the manuscript solely based on its academic merit without bias.
  2. Plagiarism Check: Inform the editors if you suspect plagiarism or other ethical violations.
  3. Confidentiality: Do not use information obtained during the review process for personal research or gain.

 

Post-Review Process

  • Submit your review through the journal’s online submission system within the allotted time.
  • Include comments for the authors and confidential remarks for the editors, if necessary.

 

Reviewer Recognition

JSFIS values the contributions of its reviewers and acknowledges their efforts through:

  • Certificates of appreciation.
  • Opportunities for serving on the editorial board based on performance.