Scholarly Publication is dedicated to maintaining high research standards. Our peer review system ensures the accuracy and importance of submitted work, boosts our journal’s credibility, and upholds academic integrity. By providing expert feedback, peer review refines manuscripts, corrects errors, and enhances research quality before publication. This rigorous process not only preserves our journals’ reputation but also advances knowledge in the field. We extend our heartfelt thanks and sincere respect to all reviewers for their valuable contributions.

Becoming a Journal Reviewer

Are you interested in reviewing cutting-edge research and contributing to the scholarly community? This page details how to begin your peer review journey with Scholarly Publication, where you’ll receive various benefits and rewards. For information on the benefits of reviewing for journals of Scholarly Publication, including our 10% reviewer article processing charge discount program, see the Reviewer Rewards and Recognition below.

Our Peer Review System

All submitted manuscripts to journals of Scholarly Publication, are initially reviewed by the editors. Only those papers that are likely to meet our editorial standards are sent for formal review. Manuscripts deemed by the editors to be of insufficient general interest or otherwise unsuitable will be promptly rejected without external review.

For formal review, we seek two independent expert reviewers, chosen for their expertise, reliability, and experience to evaluate and comment on each article. Reviewers are checked for conflicts of interest, but if you have one, please decline the invitation. Reviewers are asked to respond quickly to the invitation, either accepting or declining. If declining, reviewers are encouraged to suggest alternative reviewers who are qualified and available. If accepted, reviewers are expected to submit a report with a recommendation to accept, reject, or request revisions (classified as major or minor). Editors make the final decision based on the reviewers’ feedback and provide the authors with the outcome.

Ethics for Reviewers

Reviewers must conduct the review themselves; submitting a review under another name is misconduct. Scholarly Publication may request proof of identity if identity fraud is suspected. If you have peer review experience, you can volunteer to review our journals using this link.

Key Considerations Before Accepting a Peer Review Invitation

• Before accepting an invitation to review, ask yourself: Do I have the expertise to assess the manuscript’s scientific rigor, novelty, quality, and importance? If not, decline and inform the journal, suggesting another expert if possible.
• Before agreeing to review, ensure you have time to complete the reviewer report by the deadline. If you need more time, request an extension with a realistic timeline. If you’re too busy, decline the request and suggest alternative reviewers. If you’re unavailable for an extended period, inform the journal to update your contact record accordingly.
• You should decline a review request if you have a conflict of interest. However, our journals are double-blind, if you’re unsure about a potential conflict of interest, contact the editorial office. They can investigate and provide guidance.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviewers should assess the research quality objectively and provide fair and constructive feedback. They should explain and support their judgments to help authors understand the feedback and reasoning.

Maintain Confidentiality

All journals published by Scholarly Publication use a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers must ensure their identity remains anonymous to the authors, both in their comments and in any metadata in Microsoft Word or PDF reports. Additionally, information and ideas gained from reviewing must remain confidential and should not be used for competitive advantage. Also, please refrain from discussing reviewed papers with colleagues until they are published. 

Report Deadline and Extension Request

We understand you are busy and we try to avoid overloading you with many tasks. As a reviewer for journals of Scholarly Publication, you are typically expected to complete your reviewer report within 7 days. If you cannot meet this deadline, please contact the journal editor to request an extension. Reviewers should not delay the peer review process unnecessarily, either deliberately or inadvertently.

Report Suspected Misconduct

Reviewers should report any concerns about misconduct to the Editor-in-chief of the respective journal for investigation. This includes but is not limited to, suspicions of:

• Plagiarism
• Duplicate publication
• Parallel submission
• Data fabrication or falsification
• Image manipulation
• Author conflicts of interest
• Unethical research practices
• Potentially offensive content

Reviewer Rewards and Recognition

Scholarly Publication is committed to recognizing and rewarding peer review. Here are some of the benefits you can enjoy as a reviewer:

I. When you review for journals of Scholarly Publication, you may claim a 10% discount on article processing charge in any Scholarly Publication-owned journal, within six months of your review. To claim this discount, you must follow the terms and conditions below: 

• Discounts are provided at the Publisher’s discretion, depending upon the submission of a timely and thorough review report.
• Each article is eligible for only one reviewer discount.
• The discount can be applied only to articles where you are listed as an author (not necessarily as the corresponding or first author).
• The discount can be used only for papers accepted after you have completed your review.

II. Reviewers will be invited to attend academic conferences or scientific meetings organized by the Publisher at no cost.

III. By reviewing for our journals, you will be eligible for the annual Scholarly Publication Outstanding Reviewer Awards.

• Scholarly Publication Outstanding Reviewer Award

Scholarly Publication is proud to recognize excellence in reviewing, and each year our journal editorial teams select the best reviewers of the year based on the quality, quantity, and timeliness of their reviews.