Reviewers Guidelines

Sarasvata International Research Journal welcomes qualified academicians, researchers and professionals who can contribute independent subject expertise and sound scholarly judgement to its reviewer panel.

• A doctoral qualification in a relevant discipline is preferred.
• Applicants should have appropriate teaching, research or professional experience.
• A record of credible scholarly publications is desirable.
• Reviewers must understand research methods, publication ethics and confidentiality.
• Expertise should match the manuscripts accepted for review.

Interested experts may email an updated CV, institutional affiliation, subject expertise, recent publications and an academic-profile link to sarasvatajournal@gmail.com. Selection remains subject to editorial assessment and journal requirements.

• Assess originality, relevance, contribution and methodological quality.
• Evaluate title, abstract, literature, methods, results, discussion and references.
• Identify unsupported claims, substantial omissions and ethical concerns.
• Provide clear, respectful and actionable recommendations.
• Recommend acceptance, revision or rejection on academic grounds.

Accept only if the manuscript falls within your competence, no disqualifying conflict exists and the report can be completed within the requested period. Decline promptly when these conditions are not met and, where appropriate, suggest alternative experts.

Treat the manuscript, data, supplementary files, author information and editorial correspondence as confidential. Do not share, quote, reproduce, retain or use unpublished material for personal, competitive or professional advantage.

Declare personal, professional, financial, academic or institutional relationships that could affect impartiality. When uncertain, disclose the situation to the editor and allow the editor to decide whether reassignment is necessary.

Begin with a brief overall assessment, then distinguish major concerns from minor comments. Explain the basis of criticism, avoid hostile language, do not demand irrelevant citations and avoid attempting to identify or contact authors during anonymous review.

Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or manipulated data, improper image alteration, unethical research or undisclosed conflicts confidentially to the editor. Do not investigate independently or make allegations directly to the author.

Submit the report within the agreed period. Recommendations should be consistent with the written comments, but the final editorial decision rests with the editor. Inform the journal immediately if delay or withdrawal becomes necessary.