Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality regarding any assigned manuscript. They must not disclose or discuss any information from the manuscript with external parties without obtaining prior approval from the Editor. Additionally, they must not retain or use any data from the manuscript for personal purposes. Reviewers are required to adhere to Academic Square Journals confidential peer review policies, which include maintaining anonymity from the authors and refraining from disseminating any manuscript content externally.

Reviewers should only accept invitations to review manuscripts that fall within their area of expertise and specialization. They are expected to conduct reviews with a high level of proficiency and fairness. If a reviewer lacks the necessary expertise to assess a manuscript adequately, they should decline the invitation, as it is assumed that reviewers possess specialized knowledge in their respective fields.

Reviewer comments should acknowledge the strengths of the manuscript while constructively addressing any weaknesses. Recommendations for improvement should be clear and well-reasoned, enabling both Editors and Authors to understand the basis of the critique. Reviewers should provide appropriate citations when referring to previously published work and must promptly inform the Editor of any suspected cases of duplicate publication. The use of discriminatory or inappropriate language in reviewer comments is strictly prohibited. All evaluations should be conducted impartially, without bias or personal interest.

Manuscript reviews must be conducted responsibly, objectively, and within the stipulated timeframe. Any suspected ethical misconduct should be reported as part of a thorough and transparent review process. Reviewers’ decisions should be based solely on scientific merit, relevance to the subject matter, and the journal’s scope, without any consideration of the authors’ financial status, race, ethnicity, or other personal attributes.

To the extent possible, reviewers should avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict of interest arises, the reviewer must promptly inform the Editor, providing a clear explanation of the nature of the conflict. Reviewers are ethically obligated to submit their review comments within the designated timeframe and to respond promptly to any queries from the Editor. Maintaining effective communication with both the publisher and the Editor is essential.