I. Considerations before accepting or declining to review a manuscript:
Plagiarism: Reviewers should report any breach of publishing ethics (data fabrication, authorship problems, plagiarism, duplicate submission, etc.).
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should disclose conflicts of interest (anything that might affect their review, including competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, or institutions connected to the paper under review)
Objectivity: Reviewers should be able to review the manuscript objectively in the context of the reviewer’s expertise in the field (the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided)
Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the review process (the journal uses double-blind peer review, strictly both the reviewers and the authors of the paper will not get to know each other’s identity, ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage).
If you are reviewing a manuscript, complete review within 2 weeks after receiving a manuscript is highly appreciated.
If you are unable to complete the review report in the agreed time-frame, inform the editorial team as soon as possible so extension can be arranged for continuous flow of review procedure.
II. In the event of conflicting Reviewer reports, the Editor will make the final decision.
Please consider the following aspects when reviewing a manuscript:
III. Please check the review form to provide your review result to us. Should you not use the form, kindly provide a well-structured, adequate review comments. Thank you for your contribution.
Hua Mak Campus
Ram Khamhaeng 24 Rd., Hua Mak
Bang Kapi, Bangkok 10240, Thailand.