Peer Review Portal

Reviewer Resources

Everything you need to conduct rigorous, fair, and constructive peer review for ISRI Press — from acceptance to final report submission.

Review Process Evaluation Criteria Decision Guide Responsibilities FAQ

The Review Process

Our double-blind peer review process is designed to be transparent, efficient, and respectful of your time. Here is what to expect at each stage.

Invitation & Acceptance

You receive an invitation by email with the manuscript title and abstract. Accept or decline within 5 days. Declining with a suggested alternative reviewer is appreciated.

Access the Manuscript

Upon acceptance, log in to the reviewer portal to access the full manuscript, author guidelines, and the structured review form.

Conduct Your Review

Evaluate the manuscript against our criteria: originality, methodology, clarity, and scholarly contribution. Typical review window is 21 days.

Submit Your Report

Complete the structured review form with your recommendation and detailed comments. Your feedback is blinded before being forwarded to the author.

Evaluation Criteria

Use these six criteria to structure your assessment. High-weight criteria must be addressed directly in your report; medium-weight criteria should be noted where relevant.

RC-01 High

Originality & Contribution

Does the manuscript present novel findings or perspectives? Assess the significance of the contribution to the field and whether it advances existing knowledge meaningfully.

RC-02 High

Methodology

Evaluate the rigour and appropriateness of the research design, data collection, and analytical methods. Are the methods reproducible and sufficiently described?

RC-03 Medium

Literature & Context

Is the manuscript grounded in relevant literature? Identify any significant omissions. Self-citation ratios should be noted if excessive.

RC-04 Medium

Clarity & Structure

Assess the logical flow, clarity of argument, and quality of academic writing. Flag structural inconsistencies or sections that require substantial revision.

RC-05 High

Data Integrity

Are results presented accurately and transparently? Check for data manipulation, cherry-picking, or discrepancies between raw data and reported findings.

RC-06 High

Ethics & Compliance

Confirm ethics approval is declared where required. Flag any potential plagiarism, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or concerns about research conduct.

Decision Guide

Select the recommendation that best reflects the manuscript's current state. Your recommendation is advisory — the final editorial decision rests with the handling editor.

The manuscript is of high quality, requires no or only minor typographical corrections, and is suitable for publication as submitted.

All major criteria satisfactorily met
No significant methodological concerns
Strong contribution to the field
Clear, well-structured writing

Minor Revision

The manuscript is fundamentally sound but requires small adjustments. Author responses are expected within 30 days and do not require a second full review.

Core methodology and findings valid
Small gaps in literature review
Minor clarity or structural issues
Formatting or citation corrections needed

Major Revision

The manuscript has potential but requires substantial work. A full second round of review will be conducted after resubmission.

Significant methodological concerns
Insufficient engagement with literature
Results interpretation needs strengthening
Major structural restructuring required

Reject

The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards in its current form and is not suitable for publication in ISRI Press.

Fundamental methodological flaws
Work lacks sufficient originality
Out of scope for the journal
Ethical concerns identified

Reviewer Responsibilities

Accepting a review invitation is a commitment to our authors and to the integrity of the scholarly record.

Maintain strict confidentiality of all manuscript content and reviewer identity
Declare any conflicts of interest before beginning a review
Complete reviews within the agreed 21-day window
Provide specific, constructive feedback rather than vague generalisations
Focus on scholarly merit — not personal style preferences or minor language issues
Identify relevant cited and uncited literature that strengthens the manuscript
Notify the editor immediately if you suspect plagiarism or ethical violations
Refrain from contacting authors directly at any stage of the review

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions from reviewers about invitations, timelines, confidentiality, and recognition.

How do I become a reviewer for ISRI Press? +

Reviewers are invited based on their published expertise in relevant fields. You may also register your interest via the Reviewer Registry in the portal, listing your areas of expertise, ORCID, and current institutional affiliation. Editors search this registry when compiling review panels.

What happens if I cannot complete a review on time? +

Please notify the editorial office as early as possible via the reviewer portal. You may request a 7-day extension once per manuscript. If you cannot complete the review, decline promptly so the editor can invite a replacement. Late or absent reviews delay publication significantly.

Am I compensated for reviewing? +

ISRI Press does not provide financial compensation for peer review. However, active reviewers receive recognition through annual Reviewer of the Year awards, verified certificates of review (useful for academic CVs), and reciprocal fast-track consideration for their own submissions.

Can I recommend other reviewers when declining? +

Yes, and we strongly encourage it. When declining an invitation, you may suggest up to two qualified colleagues in the portal. Please ensure they have no conflicts of interest with the manuscript authors.

Is my identity protected during the review? +

Yes. ISRI Press uses double-blind peer review. Your identity is never revealed to authors unless you voluntarily choose to sign your report — an option available at submission. Author identities are similarly withheld from you during the review process.