Editorial Expectations for Reviewers
The editorial expectations for reviewers are grounded in fairness, respect, and intellectual responsibility. Reviewers are expected to engage critically yet constructively with the work they evaluate, keeping in mind the author's effort and potential for contribution.
Critical Engagement
Reviewers should engage critically yet constructively with the work they evaluate, keeping in mind the author's effort and potential for contribution.
Evaluation Standards
Detailed Assessment
Thorough and reasoned evaluations
Evidence-Based
Support assessments with evidence
Scholarly Tone
Professional and objective language
Academic Mentorship
View review as educational process
Constructive Approach
They should provide detailed, reasoned, and evidence-based evaluations that assist the editorial team in reaching informed decisions. The tone of review reports should be scholarly, objective, and courteous. GRII values reviewers who view peer review as a form of academic mentorship as well as evaluation.
Enhancement Suggestions
Reviewers are encouraged to suggest new ideas, frameworks, or references that might enhance the paper's quality while preserving the author's original perspective. Through this process, reviewers contribute not only to the advancement of the journal but also to the broader mission of sustaining rigorous and ethical scholarship.
Academic Mentorship
GRII values reviewers who view peer review as a form of academic mentorship as well as evaluation.
Key Expectations
Fairness
Impartial and unbiased assessment
Respect
Respectful treatment of authors
Intellectual Responsibility
Commitment to academic excellence