Home Reviewers guidelines

Reviewers guidelines

II-Reviewer Guidelines

     1.Introduction

Thank you for agreeing to review for Uirtus, a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to advancing research in the Arts and Humanities. Your expertise ensures the quality and credibility of our publications. We value constructive, fair, and timely feedback that helps authors refine their work.

  1. Peer Review Model
  • Uirtus follows a double-blind peer review process.
  • Reviewers must not disclose their identity to authors.
  • Reviewers should declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
  1. Review Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate submissions based on the following:

  • Originality & Contribution
  • Does the paper present new insights, perspectives, or findings?
  • Is it relevant to current debates in the Arts and Humanities?
  • Theoretical & Methodological Rigor
  • Is the theoretical framework sound and well-articulated?
  • Are the research methods appropriate, well-explained, and reliable?
  • Argumentation & Clarity
  • Does the paper develop a clear, coherent, and logical argument?
  • Are claims well-supported with evidence and references?
  • Structure & Organization
  • Does the manuscript follow a logical flow (introduction, literature review, analysis, conclusion)?
  • Is it well-structured and easy to follow?
  • Language & Style
  • Is the paper written in clear, academic language?
  • Are there grammatical or stylistic issues that hinder readability?
  • Referencing & Ethical Compliance
  • Are sources properly cited using the required citation style (MLA)?
  • Are there any ethical concerns (plagiarism, misrepresentation of data, conflicts of interest)?
  1. Review Process & Recommendations

4.1. Steps for Review

  • Read the manuscript thoroughly and assess it using the criteria above.
  • Provide constructive feedback—highlight strengths and suggest improvements.
  • Submit a review report using the journal’s review form or structured comments.

4.2. Reviewer Recommendations

After evaluation, reviewers should recommend one of the following:

🔹 Accept as is – The paper meets all criteria and requires no changes.
🔹 Accept with minor revisions – The paper is strong but needs slight improvements.
🔹 Revise and resubmit – The paper has potential but requires substantial changes.
🔹 Reject – The paper does not meet the journal’s standards.

  1. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Maintain confidentiality—manuscripts should not be shared or discussed.
  • Avoid bias and conflicts of interest—notify the editor if a conflict exists.
  • Provide objective and respectful feedback—avoid personal criticism.
  • Report ethical concerns—flag potential plagiarism, data fabrication, or misconduct.
  1. Review Timeline & Submission
  • Reviews should be completed within 2 weeks from acceptance.
  • If more time is needed, reviewers should inform the editorial team.
  • Reviews should be submitted via the journal’s online system or email.
  1. Acknowledgment & Benefits
  • Reviewers contribute to advancing scholarly research and maintaining high standards.
  • Regular reviewers may be recognized on the journal website and considered for editorial board invitations.
  • Reviewers receive certificates of appreciation upon request.
  1. Contact Information

For any questions, please contact the editorial team at:
[email protected] or [email protected]
🌐 https://uirtus.net

Comments are closed.