Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Recognition

JMRAS values the contribution of reviewers as central to maintaining its academic quality. The journal formally acknowledges reviewers through annual certificates, optional public recognition on the journal's website, and integration with professional services such as Publons and ORCID. Outstanding reviewers who consistently provide insightful, timely, and constructive feedback may be nominated for editorial positions.

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, focusing on their scholarly rigor, originality, and clarity. They should provide specific, constructive feedback aimed at improving the quality of the work. All reviews must remain confidential, and reviewers must decline assignments when a conflict of interest exists. Reviewers are encouraged to complete their evaluations within twenty-one days of receiving the manuscript, ensuring an efficient publication process.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers serve as custodians of academic quality and ethics. Their role is to identify strengths, weaknesses, and potential improvements in the manuscripts they evaluate. They should report any suspected plagiarism, ethical concerns, or data inaccuracies to the editorial office immediately. Reviewers must approach every assignment with fairness, professionalism, and a commitment to advancing research integrity.

Editorial Expectations

JMRAS expects reviewers to engage with submitted work respectfully and thoughtfully. Reviews should be comprehensive, evidence-based, and free from bias or personal criticism. Timely completion of reviews is crucial to maintaining the journal's publication schedule. The editorial team values reviewers as intellectual partners whose insights contribute directly to the journal's reputation for excellence, fairness, and scholarly rigor.