Commitment to Excellence

AESS Publications is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing. Guided by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), we strive to publish rigorous, high-quality research that contributes meaningfully to scientific progress. Central to this mission is our double-blind peer review process, which ensures objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity.

 

Role of Reviewers

Reviewers play a pivotal role in the peer review process. As experts with extensive knowledge in their fields, reviewers are entrusted with evaluating manuscripts critically and constructively. Their participation is fundamental to ensuring the integrity, quality, and timeliness of the editorial process.

We recognize the essential contributions of reviewers and appreciate their commitment to the values and objectives of AESS Publications.

 

Peer Review Process

All journals under AESS Publications operate under a double-blind peer review system:

• Anonymity: Reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the process.
• Reviewer Selection: At least two subject experts are invited to review each manuscript following preliminary editorial screening.
• Review Objective: The review should focus on improving the clarity, accuracy, completeness, and scientific rigor of the manuscript.
• Outcome Support: Reviewer recommendations assist the Editor in reaching a fair decision on the manuscript’s suitability for publication.

 

Core Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to uphold the following responsibilities to ensure ethical and effective peer review:

1. Confidentiality and Integrity

• Maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscript content.
• Do not share or disclose information without the Editor’s explicit permission.
• Do not retain or distribute manuscript materials after the review is completed.

2. Ethical Conduct

• Avoid using any unpublished data or ideas from the manuscript for personal gain.
• Refrain from discussing the manuscript with others or attempting to identify the authors.
• Declare any actual or perceived conflicts of interest (e.g., financial, institutional, personal, or collaborative).

3. Subject Competency

• Accept review invitations only if you possess adequate expertise in the relevant subject area.
• Decline requests outside your field of knowledge to ensure a fair and accurate review.

4. Impartiality and Fairness

• Evaluate manuscripts based on scholarly merit—relevance, originality, accuracy, clarity, and ethical integrity—without regard to authors’ race, gender, nationality, religion, or political views.
• Provide objective, unbiased, and respectful feedback to help authors improve their work.

5. Ethical Oversight

• Inform the Editor of any suspicion of plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, redundant publication, or other forms of misconduct.
• Raise concerns regarding ethical treatment of human or animal subjects, informed consent, or lack of ethical approval where applicable.

6. Contribution to Decision Making

• Submit detailed, clear, and constructive review reports with specific suggestions and corrections.
• Support the Editor by highlighting the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses, and by giving a reasoned recommendation.

 

Instructions for Reviewers

When asked to review a manuscript:

• Respond Promptly: Acknowledge the review invitation within 3–5 days.
• Timely Submission: Complete and return your review within 2 weeks unless otherwise agreed.
• Respect Deadlines: Notify the Editor in advance if a delay is unavoidable.
• Balanced Evaluation: Highlight strengths and provide constructive criticism—avoid dismissive or hostile language.
• Review Structure: Address all review criteria (e.g., significance, methodology, ethics, clarity, references).
• Do Not Contact Authors: Maintain confidentiality and refrain from contacting authors directly.
• Keep a Copy: Retain your review notes for use in assessing any resubmitted version.
• Post-Review Follow-up: Be available for follow-up communication from the Editor if needed. 

Final Notes

By accepting a review assignment, reviewers agree to uphold AESS Publications’ commitment to academic excellence and integrity. We deeply value your expertise, fairness, and dedication to the scientific community.

Thank you for supporting AESS Publications in advancing high-quality research.