Peer-reviewers lie at the core of the scholarly publishing process since they play a critical role in content quality control. For that reason, the CBR series encourages the reviewers to submit comprehensive, constructive, objective, and transparent reports.

There are two ways to become a reviewer, either by direct invitation from a Volume Editor or by subscribing as a reviewer. In case you wish to be part of the pool of reviewers, it is important to provide accurate contact information including affiliation and research interests.

Accepting a review invitation implies the following:

  • Agree to review only if you have the required expertise to assess the paper.
  • Provide accurate personal and professional contact information to the editors.
  • Accept if there are no conflicting interests with the authors. Competing interests may be of personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious nature.
  • Follow the series guidelines on peer review.
  • Undertake a response to the peer review within the required time-frame.
  • Read the paper and any supplementary material, if exists. In case of missing materials or incomplete information, contact only the editor.
  • Confidentiality during the peer review process is highly important. For that reason, do not use information derived from this process for your own or other’s benefits; anyone else can be involved in the review of the paper.
  • If during the review process, a competing interest is discovered, the Volume Editor needs to be notified.
  • The review report should be written in the format required by the series.
  • Reviewers are encouraged to be objective and constructive and, if possible, provide references to support general statements. Notice that the aim of peer review is to help authors to improve the paper.
  • As a reviewer, you are allowed to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as a recommendation to accept, consider with minor revisions, consider with major revisions, or reject the paper. The final recommendation should be consistent with the comments for the authors. In case you have not reviewed the whole document, please inform the editor about the sections that were assessed.
  • The following criteria are asked at the time to assess the paper:
    • The objective, methodology, and results are consistent;
    • The research questions or hypothesis are valid;
    • The study is original;
    • Previous research findings have been presented, discussed and compared with the results of the study;
    • The language and presentation of the figures and tables are clear;
    • The references are complete and coherent with the content of the paper and the status of the field.

All the CBR’s publication practices are inspired by the COPE Guidelines. For that reason, we invite reviewers to deepen into the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Any suspicious of misconduct during the review process should be informed to the Editorial Office. For more information about our editorial policies, please visit this page.

All those who have acted as reviewers, their names will be publicly available on the series’s website.