ACE Journal of Neurosciences (ACEJN) recognizes the essential contribution of reviewers in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of published research. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations that assist editors in making informed editorial decisions and help authors improve their manuscripts.
Peer Review Model
ACEJN follows a single-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the reviewers remain confidential while the reviewers have access to the authors' identities. This model promotes an independent and objective assessment of each manuscript based on its scientific quality, originality, methodology, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's scope.
Role of Reviewers
Reviewers are expected to:
- Evaluate the originality, scientific quality, and significance of the research.
- Assess the validity of the study design, methodology, statistical analysis, and conclusions.
- Identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas requiring improvement.
- Provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments for both editors and authors.
- Recommend whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.
- Identify possible ethical concerns, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, image manipulation, or undisclosed conflicts of interest.
- Complete reviews within the agreed review period.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers should:
- Treat all submitted manuscripts as strictly confidential.
- Review manuscripts objectively, fairly, and without personal bias.
- Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
- Decline review invitations if they lack the necessary expertise or cannot complete the review on time.
- Avoid using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.
Ethical Standards
Reviewers are expected to follow internationally accepted publication ethics and maintain the highest standards of professional conduct throughout the review process. Any suspected research misconduct should be reported confidentially to the Editorial Office.
Becoming a Reviewer
Researchers and professionals with expertise in neuroscience or related disciplines are welcome to join the ACEJN reviewer panel. Prospective reviewers should possess relevant academic qualifications, research experience, and a strong publication record in their area of specialization.
Those interested in serving as reviewers are encouraged to send the following information to the Editorial Office:
- Full Name
- Institutional Affiliation
- Academic Position
- Areas of Expertise
- ORCID iD (if available)
- Recent Publications
- Curriculum Vitae (CV)
Guide for Peer Reviewers
When reviewing a manuscript, reviewers are encouraged to consider the following questions:
- Is the research original and scientifically significant?
- Does the title accurately reflect the content of the manuscript?
- Is the research methodology appropriate and clearly described?
- Are the data and statistical analyses accurate and reliable?
- Are the conclusions supported by the results?
- Are ethical standards adequately addressed?
- Is the manuscript clearly written and well organized?
- Are the references current, relevant, and appropriate?
Constructive recommendations should be provided wherever improvements are needed, enabling authors to strengthen the quality and impact of their work.
