Reviewer Guideline
These guidelines are intended for reviewers of the Asian Journal of Social Innovation and Development (AJSID). Their purpose is to support a peer review process that is technically sound, ethical, and constructive.
Peer review is a core component of academic publishing. Reviewers are expected not only to provide a recommendation but also to offer feedback that helps improve the scientific quality of the manuscript and supports editorial decision-making.
1. Invitation to Review
1.1 Receiving the Invitation
Invitations to review are automatically sent via email by the journal's system. The email typically includes the manuscript title, abstract, and review deadline. You can access the journal via the link in the email or by logging directly into the journal system, where you can view submissions assigned to you. Journal editors may also send invitations via the editorial office email; you can accept or decline these invitations directly via email.
1.2 Checklist Before Accepting
Subject: Does the manuscript fall within your area of expertise? If not, please inform the editor and consider recommending other reviewers.
Timeline: Can you complete the review within the specified timeframe? If not, please notify the editor as soon as possible.
Conflict of Interest: If any conflicts exist (personal, institutional, financial, or academic), please inform the editor and decline the invitation immediately.
2. Logging In and Locating Assigned Submissions
After logging into the journal, the system displays a dashboard. Submissions assigned to you are listed in the review queue. Click "View" to open the submission and see the details.
3. Accepting or Declining the Review
On the manuscript page, you can view the title, abstract, keywords, and review schedule. Before proceeding, you are usually required to accept a statement regarding policies and terms. You can then choose to "Accept Review" or "Decline Review Request".
4. Downloading and Reviewing Files
Once you accept the review, you can download the manuscript file (PDF) and any supplementary files. These files must be used strictly for review purposes and must not be shared or discussed publicly.
5. Review Criteria
Originality and Contribution: Does the study add value to the field and fill a clear gap?
Title and Abstract: Do they accurately reflect the study's content and summarize the key points
Methods: Is the methodology appropriate, clearly described, and reproducible?
Results and Discussion: Are the findings consistent with the data and reasonably interpreted in the context of relevant literature?
Scope Alignment: Does the manuscript fit the journal's aims and scope?
Writing and Presentation: Is the language clear, and are the tables and figures easy to understand?
6. Drafting Review Comments
Comments to the Author: This section is visible to the author. Please maintain a respectful and constructive tone. Provide specific, actionable suggestions whenever possible.
Comments to the Editor: This section is visible only to the editor and may include policy concerns, ethical issues, or procedural notes.
7. Uploading the Annotated File (Very Important)
If you have added comments, tracked changes, or annotations directly to the manuscript file, you must upload the annotated file back into the system. Failure to upload this file means the editor and author will not be able to see your feedback.