DUTIES OF REVIEWER
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the authors in improving the paper. Any selected expert who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editors and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have cited. The relevant citation should accompany any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. A reviewer should also call the editors' attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they have personal knowledge of.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Reviewers and editors are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.