peer review guidelines
Timeliness: Reviewers should aim to complete their review within the given timeframe (usually 2-3 weeks). If additional time is needed, reviewers should notify the editor as soon as possible.
- Confidentiality: The peer review process is confidential, and reviewers should not share the manuscript or any information about it with anyone outside the review process.
- Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships with the author(s) or competing interests.
- Objectivity: Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript objectively and based on its scientific merit, regardless of personal beliefs or biases.
- Thoroughness: Reviewers should read the manuscript carefully and provide a thorough review of all aspects, including the research question, methodology, data analysis, and conclusions.
- Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide constructive feedback to help authors improve the manuscript, including suggestions for revisions or additional analyses.
- Ethical Concerns: Reviewers should report any ethical concerns, such as plagiarism or data fabrication, to the editor.
- Clarity: Reviewers should provide a clear and concise review report, with specific comments and recommendations for revision or acceptance.
- Communication: Reviewers should communicate with the editor if they have any questions or concerns during the review process.
- Professionalism: Reviewers should maintain a professional and respectful tone in their review, and avoid personal attacks or derogatory comments.
Overall, the peer review process plays a critical role in ensuring the quality and scientific integrity of clinical psychology research. By adhering to these guidelines, reviewers can provide valuable feedback to authors and help advance the field of clinical psychology.