For Reviewers
Ethics for reviewers Reviewers' responsibilities
Reviewer benefits How to become a reviewer for this journal?
Ethics for reviewers
Peer reviews are conducted as a double-blind process via our Open Journal System (OJS). As a reviewer's comments will determine the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts, these comments play an important role in the peer-review process.
- Treat all material of the manuscript as confidential, the peer review should not be seen as an opportunity to appropriate the author's ideas or data, and should not be distributed, shared, used or otherwise supplied to third parties before publication.
- Reviews should be conducted fairly and objectively. Remarks and suggestions should not contain insults or criticism directed at the author as opposed to the manuscript.
- Reviews should not agree to review a manuscript just to gain sight of it with no intention of submitting a review, or agree to review a manuscript that is very similar to one you have in preparation or under consideration at another journal.
- The journal follows Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers by COPE. Reviewers should:
*Ensure you declare all potential competing, or conflicting, interests. If you are unsure about a potential competing interest that may prevent you from reviewing, do raise this.
*Competing interests may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious in nature.
*If you are currently employed at the same institution as any of the authors or have been recent (eg, within the past 3 years) mentors, mentees, close collaborators or joint grant holders, you should not agree to review.
Reviewers' responsibilities
Reviewers are advised to adhere to the following:
Reviewed articles and their contents should be kept strictly confidential.
Reviews should be objective and constructive, personal criticisms are to be avoided, and the feedback provided by your review will help the authors improve their manuscript.
Promptness in response: Reviewers should inform the journal if they are unable to take part in the peer review of a particular manuscript. If you feel qualified to judge a particular manuscript and are able to submit your comments before the deadline given by the journal, please click "Accept Review" on the system and be sure to inform the journal promptly if your circumstances change and you cannot fulfill your original agreement or if you require an extension.
Refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to your (or an associate's) work merely to increase citation counts or to enhance the visibility of your or your associate’s work; suggestions must be based on valid academic or technological reasons.
Do not intentionally prolong the review process, either by delaying the submission of your review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from the journal or author.
If a submission contains supplementary materials, the reviewers are also required to evaluate them at the same level as the content of the main manuscript.
When writing a reviewer report please consider:
Does the manuscript fit within the stated scope of the journal?
Are the research methods scientific and reliable?
Does the work have Impact and novelty?
Are the data valid?
Are the conclusions sound?
Is the English writing acceptable?
Potential misconduct or ethical concerns. If you detect these ethical concerns, such as data fabrication/manipulation, plagiarism, redundant publication, and regarding approval for the use of human or animal subjects, please inform the editor.
References
-Suitability of references used
-Other relevant research which should be referenced in the paper
-Uncited content
Reviewer benefits
- Stay up-to-date with the latest research in your field.
- Understanding the Peer Review Process.
- Showcase your expertise in a specific area.
- Contribute your professional knowledge to fellow scholars in your field.
- Participating in academic publishing as a reviewer can help to advance your field by providing new insights and perspectives.
- The benefits provided by the publisher to reviewers include discount vouchers for article processing fees, honorary certificates, etc.
How to become a reviewer for this journal?
We welcome and encourage scholars who meet the following requirements to apply to become reviewers for Clean Energy Technologies :
a. Hold a doctoral degree or above;
b. Have published at least 3 articles in international journals relevant to the scope of the journal;
c. Maintain a strong interest in the field of agricultural economics;
d. Maintain a fair and impartial attitude towards science.
We set these requirements to ensure the quality of peer review. If you meet the above requirements and are interested in joining our list of potential reviewers, please send us your name, affiliation, CV, and the field of review you are interested in. Please contact our editorial office at cet@nassg.org. Thank you for taking the time to contribute to the journal Clean Energy Technologies.