Ethics for reviewers

Smart Ship Technologies is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, impartiality, and accountability throughout the publication process. All editorial decisions are based solely on the academic merit, originality, and relevance of submitted work, while rigorously adhering to principles of transparency, impartiality, and confidentiality. Reviewers are required to adhere to the following principles:

All materials of the manuscript must be treated as strictly confidential. The peer review process should not be viewed as an opportunity to appropriate the author's ideas or data, nor should the manuscript be distributed, shared, used, or otherwise supplied to third parties prior to publication. Reviews must be conducted in a fair and objective manner. Remarks and suggestions should be directed at the manuscript and its content, not at the author personally. Personal insults or undue criticism should be avoided.

Reviewers should not agree to review a manuscript solely to gain access to it without the intention of submitting a review. Similarly, they should not agree to review a manuscript that is closely related to their own work currently under consideration at another journal or in preparation.

The journal adheres to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Reviewers are expected to:

• Declare all potential conflicts of interest. If there is any uncertainty regarding a potential conflict that might affect the objectivity of the review, this should be brought to the editor's attention.
• Conflicts of interest may include personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious considerations.
• Reviewers who are currently employed at the same institution as any of the authors, or who have recently served as mentors, mentees, close collaborators, or joint grant holders with any of the authors (e.g., within the past 3 years), should decline to review the manuscript.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers are advised to adhere to the following guidelines:

• Confidentiality: All reviewed articles and their contents must be kept strictly confidential.
• Objectivity and Constructiveness: Reviews should be objective, constructive, and free from personal criticism. The feedback provided should help authors improve the quality of their manuscript.
• Promptness: Reviewers should inform the journal promptly if they are unable to participate in the peer review of a specific manuscript. If they feel qualified to review and are able to submit their comments before the deadline, they should click "Accept Review" in the system. In the event of any change in circumstances (e.g., inability to fulfill the review or a need for an extension), the reviewer should notify the journal as soon as possible.
• Relevance of citations: Reviewers should refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to their own work or that of associates solely to increase citation counts or visibility. All suggested citations should be based on legitimate academic or methodological relevance.
• Timeliness: Reviewers should avoid unnecessarily prolonging the review process, whether by delaying the submission of their review or by requesting excessive additional information from the journal or authors.
• Evaluation of supplementary materials: If a submission includes supplementary materials, reviewers are expected to evaluate these at the same level as the main manuscript content.

When writing a review report, please consider the following criteria:

• Does the manuscript fall within the stated scope of the journal?
• Are the research methods scientific, appropriate, and reliable?
• Does the work demonstrate impact and novelty?
• Are the data valid and properly analyzed?
• Are the conclusions well-supported by the data?
• Is the English writing clear, accurate, and suitable for publication?
• Are there any signs of potential misconduct or ethical concerns, such as data fabrication or manipulation, plagiarism, redundant (duplicate) publication, or lack of ethical approval for human or animal research? If so, please inform the editor.

References:

• Are the references appropriate and relevant?
• Are there any significant studies that should be cited but are not?
• Are there any relevant citations that are missing from the reference list?

Reviewer Benefits and Publisher Incentives

Serving as a reviewer is an important contribution to the academic community and plays a critical role in maintaining the quality and integrity of scholarly publishing. As a reviewer, you will not only support the dissemination of high-quality research but also gain a range of professional and intellectual benefits.

Benefits for Reviewers

• Stay Updated with Cutting-Edge Research: Reviewing manuscripts allows you to stay informed about the latest developments and emerging trends in your field.
• Enhance Professional Expertise: The process of critically evaluating research helps to sharpen your analytical and evaluative skills.
• Contribute to Academic Integrity: By participating in the peer review process, you help ensure the reliability and credibility of published research.
• Expand Professional Network: Reviewing for reputable journals provides opportunities to connect with editors, authors, and other experts in your discipline.
• Gain Recognition and Visibility: Your contributions as a reviewer are acknowledged and may enhance your academic profile.

Publisher Incentives for Reviewers

To express our appreciation for your valuable contributions, the publisher offers the following incentives to reviewers:

• Discounts on Article Processing Charges (APC): Eligible reviewers may receive a discount when submitting their own original research to the journal.
• Honorary Certificates: A certificate of appreciation is provided to recognize your service as a reviewer.
• Opportunities for Editorial Involvement: Exceptional reviewers may be invited to participate in editorial activities, such as guest editorial roles or editorial board membership.
• Performance Recognition: Reviewing activity may be recorded in the journal's system and can be used as evidence of scholarly service in professional evaluations or CVs.

We cordially invite scholars worldwide to serve as peer reviewers for Smart Ship Technologies. If you are interested in this vital academic role, please contact our Editorial Office at contact@explorerpress.com.