For Reviewers

Review criteria

Each of our publications seeks to provide researchers with a rigorous, constructive and timely process of peer review for their manuscript. The standard peer review process for the iFASRA is single blind.

To be accepted for publication in an iFASRA journal, a manuscript must be previously unpublished and demonstrate scientific/scholarly validity, sound methodology, sufficient clarity, and, where applicable, the research must have been conducted in accordance with any ethical standards. iFASRA strives to assess manuscripts on objective editorial criteria and reviewers should endeavour not to assess manuscripts based on the perceived level of importance or novelty.

We will provide you with online access to the manuscript and a simple scorecard to make it straightforward to review articles systematically against the journal editorial criteria.

Each journal considers a range of article types – including research articles, review articles and rapid research communications – so please ensure you have information on the manuscript’s type before starting your review.

Review timeframe
As a researcher yourself, you will appreciate that authors would like a decision as soon as possible. If you receive an invitation to review from a iFASRA journal, we hope you will respond, agreeing or declining to review, within 7 days. If you agree to review, we ask that you submit your report as soon as possible within 14 days. If you are unable to accept an invitation to review a manuscript then we welcome recommendations for alternative experts.

Reviewing revised manuscripts
If you agree to review a revised manuscript then it is usually sufficient to assess whether the authors have satisfactorily addressed the revisions requested during the initial round of peer review. The author will have provided a point-by-point response to accompany the revised manuscript to make the assessment more efficient. However, at your discretion you may consider that a full and detailed re-assessment of the manuscript is necessary.

What are the basic principles of peer review?

COPE, the Committee on Publication Ethics, has published guidance for peer reviewers (sometimes called referees).

The following basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere are taken from the COPE guidelines.

Peer reviewers should:

  • only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
  • respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
  • not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
  • declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
  • not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
  • be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments
  • acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
  • provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
  • recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.

Become a Reviewer
Rigorous and constructive peer review is central to each of the iFASRA journals. If you would like to become a reviewer for any iFASRA journal, we would be delighted to hear from you. To express your interest, please send us your resume on