South Asian Research Publishing Organization (SARPO)

Join as a reviewer

South Asian Research Publishing Organization (SARPO) would like to invite the interested professionals to contribute to publication by joining as a part of the reviewers committee. We normally encourage professionals with at least PhD in the areas covered by the journals.

Basic Requirements

1. Must hold PhD (doctoral) degree, or be Professor or Researcher of an accredited academic institution
2. The applicant must have good experience in the specific research field
3. The research field of the applicant must conform to the scope of our journal
4. Possess a very strong command of the English language, including verbal and written fluency

Responsibility of Reviewers:

• The responsibility of reviewers is to evaluate the quality, relevance, and merit of submitted papers. Comments should be as complete and detailed as possible and contain clear opinions about strengths, weaknesses, relevance, and importance to the field.
• Reviewers should consider themselves as mentors to the author(s) and comments should be specific and constructive and suggestions should be intended to enhance the manuscript.
• Reviewers will be asked to confirm the levels of evidence classified by the authors and reflected in the manuscript’s contents.
• Reviewers who consistently exhibit excellent reviews and respond promptly to editorial requests are considered for invitation to the Editorial Board.

Duties of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. SARPO shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

E-mail your CV

If you are interested in becoming the reviewer of SARPO journals, send your curriculum vitae (CV) stating your expertise and which journal you are interested in to this e-mail address: [email protected]

Your name will be added to the Reviewer’s list after screening.