Practical guidance for accepting review invitations and writing high-quality, constructive reviewer reports for KUJAS.
The reviewer report should comprehensively critique the submission and consist of more than a few brief sentences. KUJAS does not require a specific structure for reports; however, a suggested format is:
Reviewers are encouraged to help authors improve their manuscript. The report should provide constructive analysis, particularly where revisions are recommended.
If you do not wish authors to see certain comments, include them in the confidential comments to the Editor-in-Chief.
To support timely editorial decisions, reviewer reports should be submitted via the manuscript tracking system on or before the agreed deadline.
If you cannot meet the deadline, please contact KUJAS so an alternative date can be arranged.
Reviewers should focus on objective critique of the scientific aspects of the submission, including methodological soundness and whether conclusions are supported by results.
Comments may also address novelty and the potential impact of the work.
Manuscripts under peer review are strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share manuscripts or discuss their content with anyone outside the peer review process.
Reviewers may, on request, consult colleagues from their research group provided confidentiality is maintained.
Reviewers should first contact KUJAS or the Editor-in-Chief and note the colleague(s) name in the “Comments to the editor” section.
If you identify a potential conflict of interest, disclose it to the editor when you respond to the invitation.
Applications to join the KUJAS community of peer reviewers are welcome. The Editorial Board selects reviewers on a manuscript-by-manuscript basis, inviting appropriate scientists based on subject expertise and publication record.
To ensure the journal has up-to-date contact details, interested reviewers should register for a user account on the KUJAS website.
