Reviewer's Roles and Responsibilities

Eureka Journals is being supported by an honourable group of researchers and academicians who constitute a part of our Reviewer Board. They bring with them their valuable experience and critical acclaim in their respective fields of study both within the country and internationally. The Reviewer Board holds an important position in Eureka Journals. The review process assigned by an Editor lies completely in their hands. Their decision for any manuscript is always appraised by the Editorial board.

In addition to fairness in judgement and expertise in the field, reviewers have significant responsibilities toward authors, editors, and readers.

A. Reviewer Responsibilities toward Authors:

• Providing written, unbiased feedback in a timely manner on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer's opinion
• Indicating whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the work's composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the journal's readers
• Avoiding personal comments or criticism
• Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper.

B. Reviewer Responsibilities toward Editors:

• Notifying the editor immediately if unable to review in a timely manner and providing the names of potential other reviewers
• Complying with the editor's written instructions on the journal's expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review
• Providing a thoughtful, fair, constructive, and informative critique of the submitted work, which may include supplementary material provided to the journal by the author
• Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it; and recommending acceptance or rejection using whatever rating scale the editor deems most useful
• Noting any ethical concerns, such as any violation of accepted norms of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal which may be known to the reviewer
• Refraining from direct author contact.

C. Reviewer Responsibilities toward Readers and the Scientific Community:

• Ensuring that the methods are adequately detailed to allow the reader to judge the scientific merit of the study design and be able to replicate the study, if desired
• Ensuring that the article cites all relevant work by other scientists.

Benefits of Becoming Reviewer:

• Knowledge will be refreshed
• You will have stamping of your bio-data
• the scientific fraternity will understand your values
• You will be able to evaluate others and in this process you will upgrade yourself also
• Many-a-times this process evokes excellent ideas to work upon
• You will spend a quality time while reviewing others and talking with other scientists of your interest etc...