Guidelines for reviewers

Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. We select referees who are quick, careful and provide reasoning for their views. Therefore, we ask all reviewers in the journal to abide by these instructions

1- Double Blind Peer Review Policy

- AL MAYADINE AL IKTISSADIA Journal adopt the double-blinded peer review method. The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

- Reviewers play a pivotal role in scholarly publishing. The peer review system exists to validate academic work, helps to improve the quality of published research, and increases networking possibilities within research communities. peer review is still the only widely accepted method for research validation and has continued successfully.

- There are many types of peer review, AL-MAYADINE AL-IKTISSADIA Journal uses Double-blind review, the reviewers do not know the names of the authors, and the authors do not know who reviewed their manuscripts. The identities of both author and reference remain hidden. To help keep this process safe, please do not disclose your name in the text of your review.

- All reviewers who carry out peer review on behalf of AL MAYADINE AL IKTISSADIA Journal should understand and abide by the standards of confidentiality relating to the peer-review process.

2- General Instructions

- The arbitrator helps the editor and the editorial board to take the decision of publishing and helps the author in improving the article and make require corrections if needed.

- The arbitrator must initiate and expedite the evaluation of the article addressed to him within the deadlines. If this is not possible after conducting the preliminary study of the article, he must inform the editor that the subject matter is outside the arbitrator's scope of work or ask to delay arbitration due to lack of time or insufficient resources for arbitration.

- All information of the article must be confidential to arbitrator; he shall seek to preserve its confidentiality and cannot disclose or discuss its content with any party other than those authorized by the editor.

- The arbitrator must prove his review and evaluate the research directed to him by arguments and objective evidence, and avoid arbitration based on his personal, racial, sectarian or other opinion.

- The arbitrator shall attempt to identify sources and references relating to the subject which the author has not marginalized, and mention that any text or paragraph taken from other previously published works must be properly marginalized. The arbitrator shall inform the editor and warn him of any similar, or overlapping work under his arbitration.

- Reviewers must not use any information or data obtained from the reviewed manuscript for their personal advantage.

- The arbitrator shall not arbitrate the articles for personal purposes; therefore, he should not accept the arbitration of articles where there is an interest of persons or institutions or where personal relations are observed.

- Reviewers' names and affiliations must be maintained in a secure database that is compliant with data protection standards.