Kirkuk University Journal for Agricultural Sciences (KUJAS)

Home

Submit Manuscript

Editorial Board

Aims and Scope

Animal and Ethical Approval

Publication Ethics

Guide for Authors

Guide for Reviewer

Indexing and Abstracting

DOI Use

Peer Review Process

The Time Period of Reviewing Process

Privacy Statement

Article Processing Charges (APC)

Reviewers

Contact Us

Reviewers

Reviewers

KUJAS appreciates the time and expertise reviewers contribute to strengthening manuscripts and protecting the quality of the scholarly record. Peer review is a professional responsibility that requires fairness, confidentiality, and timely, constructive feedback.

★

Reviewer Role

It is an honor to read and comment on a colleague’s manuscript; however, the task requires significant time and careful judgment. The Editorial Board, authors, and readers of KUJAS are grateful for your willingness to take on this obligation.

KUJAS uses a double-blind peer review process designed to support impartial editorial decisions and ensure the quality of published articles. Reviewers are expected to provide insightful and helpful comments, typically within three weeks.

Key expectation: Reviews must be unbiased, fair, confidential, and based on scientific merit.
R

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Quality and Timeliness

  • Provide in-depth, constructive comments to help authors improve the manuscript.
  • Review revised versions when requested, within reasonable timelines.
  • Submit the review report by the deadline set by the journal.
  • Recommend to the editor whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.

Ethics and Professional Conduct

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest related to the authors, institutions, or content.
  • Report suspected research misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation, unethical research).
  • If unable to review, promptly decline and (where appropriate) suggest alternative qualified reviewers.
  • Write the review report in English.

Confidentiality

  • Treat the manuscript and associated data as confidential.
  • Do not share the manuscript or discuss its content outside the peer review process.
  • Do not use ideas, data, or text from the manuscript for personal advantage.
  • Do not contact authors directly, even if you believe you can identify them.

Independence

  • Do not delegate the review to another person without editorial permission.
  • Base your report on evidence and scientific reasoning, not personal opinions.
  • Focus on originality, methodological soundness, reporting quality, and the validity of conclusions.
✓

What Should Reviewers Consider?

Scientific Value

  • Novelty and originality of the research.
  • Contribution to the field and potential impact.
  • Consistency with scientific principles and evidence.
  • Whether the results support the conclusions.

Quality and Compliance

  • Ethical considerations (including approvals/consent when applicable).
  • Compliance with KUJAS formatting and author instructions.
  • Use of up-to-date and relevant references supporting key claims.
  • Language quality: spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
  • Any signs of scientific misconduct (e.g., fabrication, falsification, deceptive reporting).