First: Criteria for Selecting Reviewers

1. The reviewer must have a solid understanding of the research area and be familiar with its specific details.
2. The reviewer should possess demonstrable experience and competence in their respective academic field.
3. The reviewer must hold an academic rank of Assistant Professor or higher.
4. The reviewer must have previous academic experience or be currently engaged in academic work.
5. The reviewer is expected to maintain professionalism in all aspects of their role.
6. The reviewer must be thoroughly familiar with the principles and ethics of academic peer review.
7. The reviewer must demonstrate neutrality, objectivity, and integrity in conducting reviews.

Second: General Rights of Reviewers

1. Reviewers are entitled to receive a compensation for their effort and time.
2. Reviewers have the right to accept or decline a manuscript based on clear and justified reasons.
3. Reviewers may decline to review a manuscript without the need to provide justification.
4. Reviewers are eligible to publish in the journal.
5. Reviewers may request an official certificate of service from the journal after completing one year of collaboration.

Third: Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Ensuring the originality, academic rigor, and quality of the submitted manuscript.
2. Identifying strengths and weaknesses of the research and providing constructive feedback where appropriate.
3. Avoiding arbitrary or hasty judgments and maintaining a structured evaluation approach.
4. Maintaining strict confidentiality throughout the review process.
5. Adhering to the timeframe allocated for the peer review.
6. Ensuring that evaluations are conducted objectively and free from personal bias.
7. Providing any relevant comments or suggestions deemed necessary for the improvement of the manuscript.

Fourth: Ethical Standards for Reviewers

1. Reviewers must uphold academic integrity, impartiality, objectivity, and honesty, and must not be influenced by personal relationships or interests.
2. Reviewers must avoid both haste and unnecessary delay in responding, as both can compromise the quality of the review.
3. Review reports should be written in a clear, direct, and grammatically sound language, free from ambiguity and errors.
4. Reviewers must immediately decline any assignments they are unable to complete.
5. Reviewers must comply with the journal’s peer review policies and guidelines.
6. Reviewers must respect the intellectual property rights of the authors and refrain from any misuse of the submitted material.