Reviewer Guideline

Reviewer Guidelines

The Journal of Inequalities and Mathematical Analysis (JIMA) relies on the expertise of peer reviewers to maintain its high-quality publication standards. Below are the guidelines for reviewers to ensure a smooth and professional review process.

Steps to Review an Article

  1. Accessing the System
    Log in to the journal's submission system with your credentials. Navigate to the "Reviewer Panel" under the My Journals section.

  2. Review Invitation

    • Click on the title of the assigned manuscript under the "New Invitations" tab.
    • Accept or decline the review invitation promptly. If accepting, click on the “Accept Review” button to proceed.

  3. Review Process

    • Download the manuscript from the "Documents" section.
    • Evaluate the article using the review form available in the "Reviews" section. Include specific feedback and recommendations.
    • Upload your completed review report, if applicable.

  4. Submitting Your Review
    Finalize and submit your review by clicking the "Submit Review" button. Ensure all feedback is clear, constructive, and respectful.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Confidentiality: Treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Do not share or disclose the manuscript or its contents to anyone without prior permission from the editor.
  • Objectivity: Provide an unbiased assessment of the manuscript, avoiding personal criticism of the authors. Focus on constructive suggestions to improve the work.
  • Timeliness: Complete the review within the allocated time, typically 30 days. Notify the editor immediately if delays are anticipated.
  • Conflict of Interest: Disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect your ability to provide an impartial review.

Key Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are expected to provide feedback on the following:

  • Title and Abstract: Do they accurately reflect the content?
  • Language and Clarity: Is the manuscript well-written and easy to understand?
  • Novelty and Significance: Does the manuscript contribute new insights to the field?
  • Methodology and Data: Are the methods and data valid, reliable, and clearly presented?
  • References: Are the references relevant, accurate, and up-to-date?
  • Organization: Is the manuscript logically structured with clear conclusions?

Reviewers should classify their recommendations as:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Peer Review Process

• Referee Assignments
A minimum of two referees are assigned to each manuscript. However, additional referees may be appointed if the article requires specialized expertise or further evaluation.

• Decision Criteria

  • In cases where one review report is positive and the other is negative, the manuscript will be forwarded to a third referee for further consideration.
  • At least two positive review reports are required for acceptance, while a single negative report is sufficient for rejection.

This ensures that all manuscripts are reviewed rigorously and decisions are made fairly.

Ethical Considerations

  • Respect the confidentiality of the blind peer review process.
  • Avoid using any unpublished material from the manuscript in your own work.
  • Notify the editor if you suspect ethical violations, such as plagiarism or data fabrication.

Acknowledgment of Review Contributions

Reviewers' contributions are highly valued, and their names remain confidential unless they choose to disclose their identity in communication with the authors.