Be Our Peer Reviewer
Join us as member before you become our a peer reviewer of our journals. Peer reviewer receives an early view of the new research and discovery in the field. You will receive the recognition that boost your career development in the academic field.
Complete the below and submit with the relevant documents.
Fill up the form and attach with your documents before submission.
i) Curriculum Vitae/ Resume
ii) Highest Academic Qualification copy
iii) Identity card or passport copy
Peer Reviewer's Mission
Peer review, also known as refereeing, is a collaborative process that allows independent experts in the same field of research to evaluate and comment on manuscript submissions. The outcome of a peer review gives authors feedback to improve their work and, critically, allows the editor to assess the paper’s suitability for publication. The practice of peer review is intended to ensure that only good and relevant submissions to the objective of our journals are published. All new submissions are peer-reviewed according to the process detailed below, since our peer reviewers are essential in upholding the high standards of our journals. Authors who have benefited from the peer review process should consider becoming peer reviewers as a part of their professional responsibilities.
Benefits As Our Peer Reviewer
1. Keep up with the latest research
As a reviewer, you get an early view of the exciting new research happening in your field. Not only that, peer review gives you a role in helping to evaluate and improve this new work.
2. Improve your own writing
Reviewing articles written by other researchers can give you insight into how to improve your own. The process of reviewing encourages you to think critically about what makes an article good (or not so good). As you review more papers, you’ll start to spot common mistakes. This could relate to writing style, presentation, or the clarity of explanations. You can then use this knowledge in your own writing and improve your chances of publication.
3. Boost your career
While a lot of reviewing is anonymous, there are schemes to recognize the important contribution of reviewers. These include reviewer lists in journals and reviewer certificates. You can also include your reviewing work on your resume. Your work as a reviewer will interest appointment or promotion committees looking for evidence of service to the profession.
4. Become part of a journal’s community
Many journals are the center of a network of researchers who discuss key themes and developments in the field. Becoming a reviewer is a great way to get involved with that group. This gives you the opportunity to build new connections for future collaborations. Being a regular reviewer may also be the first step to becoming a member of the jou
Peer Reviewer's Criteria
- Qualified: Reviewers should typically hold at least a master’s degree in education, psychology or at least a registered therapist/ counselor of a reputable professional organisation such as International Association of Counselors & Therapists, Association of Educational Therapist, British Psychology Society, Singapore Psychological Society.
- Expert: Reviewers should have published at least three articles as lead author in a relevant topic, with at least one article having been published in the last three years. In fields where a reviewer’s expertise is not typically measured by their publication record or if the suggested reviewer’s expertise is demonstrable in ways other than their publication record, please provide an explanation of their suitability.
- Independence. We employ a ‘double-blind’ reviewing procedure. As such, the peer reviewers and the author(s) remain anonymous to each other, ensuring that the reviewing process is independent. Reviewers should declare any conflict of interest (refer to Conflict of Interest Policy) such as their relationships and activities that might bias their evaluation of a manuscript and recuse themselves from the peer-review process if a conflict exists. For example, a reviewer should not:
- have co-authored with any of the lead authors in the three years preceding publication;
- currently work at the same institution as the authors;
- be a close collaborator with an author.
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details. All peer reviewers are obliged to maintain a high standard of confidentiality of the manuscript until it is published (refer to Confidentiality and Protection of Research Authors Policy. Reviewers therefore should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers must not publicly discuss authors’ work and must not appropriate authors’ ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews. Reviewers who seek assistance from a trainee or colleague in the performance of a review should acknowledge these individuals’ contributions in the written comments submitted to the editor. These individuals must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript as outlined above.
- Citation Manipulation: Request to add citations where the motivations are merely self-promotional this aim violates publication ethics and is unethical (refer to Citation Manipulation Policy). Due care to be exercised by the reviewers when making suggestions to any reference to their own work. Acceptance of the remarks pertaining to such suggestions are at the discretion of the editorial team.
- Global: For any given article, we require that reviewers are from different institutions. We also strongly encourage authors to suggest geographically-diverse reviewers to gain an international perspective on the article. If all suggested reviewers are from the same institution or country, the Editorial Team will request that additional names of potential reviewers from different locations are provided.
- Timeliness: It is courteous to respond to an invitation to peer-review within a reasonable time frame, even if you cannot undertake the review. If you feel qualified to judge a particular manuscript, you should agree to review only if you are able to return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time frame.
The Review Process
1. Journal receives a paper.
2. Journal editors checks the paper against the journal’s aims and scope.
3. The editor then selects 2 to 3 peer reviewers and sends the paper.
4. The reviewers read the paper and provide comments, suggestions and a recommendation (reject, revise or accept). The reviewers must complete the Peer Review Report and Peer Review Checklist after evaluating whether the manuscript
- Is original as to thought (refer to Originality Policy) and method (including data) (refer to Data and Software Availability Policy)
- Is methodologically sound
- Provides clarity and has results which support the conclusions
- Provides accurate and thorough citations of prior, pertinent work
- Adheres to applicable ethical standards, especially those relating to plagiarism (refer to Plagiarism Policy)
- Clearly advances the state of knowledge in the industry
5. The editor checks the reviews and sends them to the author(s), with any extra guidance. If there are revisions, the author(s) decides whether to make these and re-submit.
6. Authors make amendments and re-submit the paper.
7. If the journal accepts the paper, it moves into production and is published.