Guidelines for Reviewers
Role of Reviewers
Peer reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of JCARME.
Reviewers are expected to provide independent, objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
Reviewers must not share manuscript content, review materials, or unpublished information with other individuals without authorization from the journal.
Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained during peer review for personal, professional, or financial advantage.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must decline an assignment when they have a personal, professional, institutional, financial, collaborative, competitive, or other relationship that could reasonably compromise their impartiality.
If a potential conflict becomes apparent after accepting an assignment, the reviewer should immediately inform the editor.
Scientific Evaluation
Reviewers should consider, where applicable:
- originality and novelty;
- relevance to the scope of JCARME;
- scientific significance;
- methodological rigor;
- validity of analytical, numerical, computational, or experimental methods;
- quality and interpretation of results;
- clarity of presentation;
- adequacy of references;
- reproducibility and transparency;
- limitations of the study;
- consistency between methods, results, and conclusions.
Reviewer Reports
Reviewer comments should be professional, specific, constructive, and supported by scientific reasoning.
Reviewers should distinguish between major scientific concerns and minor editorial suggestions.
Reviewers should not recommend citations solely to increase the citation count of themselves, their colleagues, or JCARME.
Use of Artificial Intelligence
Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, confidential review materials, unpublished data, or other confidential information to publicly accessible AI systems.
AI tools may be used only for limited supportive purposes, such as language checking or organizational assistance, provided that:
- confidentiality is fully protected;
- the reviewer remains responsible for the content and accuracy of the review;
- the AI tool does not make the substantive editorial judgment;
- the use of AI does not result in disclosure of confidential manuscript information.
Reviewers remain fully responsible for the final review report.
Recommendation
Reviewers may recommend:
- Accept
- Minor Revision
- Major Revision
- Reject
The reviewer should provide sufficient justification for the recommendation.
The final editorial decision is made by the journal and may differ from the reviewer's recommendation.