If you are interested in reviewing articles for one or more of our journals, please register your contact details, including your ORCID identifier, LinkedIn Profile, institutional affiliation, a short CV, and 5-6 keywords in line with your expertise at the following page Login Page.
ISRDO welcomes you to apply for a place in the Editorial board or in a
Reviewer Panel, so that we could grow and could share the purest of
If you have any questions, please contact our team : [email protected]
Review is an essential part in the publication process, ensuring that ISRDO maintains high quality standards for its published papers. Reviewing is often an unseen and unrewarded task. We are striving to recognize the efforts of Editor.
When reviewing for ISRDO journals you:
The Editor-in-Chief is a champion of the journal and their discipline. They supervise journal activities, with the aim to ensure success of the journal within the scientific community. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the scientific quality and development of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief is expected to maintain connection to the Editorial Board and assist the Editorial Office in the management of the journal. The initial term is for 2-3 years, which entails:
Acting as ambassador for the journal, ISRDO and Open Access publishing;
Publication Decisions: The editor-in-chief of an article or scientific report is the only one responsible for the decision on the articles to be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always subscribe to such decisions. A publisher may be guided by the policies of the editorial board of a publication and constrained by the legal requirements in place for such matters as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Publishing supervisor may consult other Publishing manager or reviewers to make these decisions.
Peer Review : The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial and timely. Research articles should generally be reviewed by at least two or three independent external reviewers. The editor should, if necessary, seek additional advice. The Editor-in-Chief will select reviewers with relevant expertise in the relevant field and will follow best practices to avoid the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief will review all potential conflict of interest disclosures and self-referral suggestions made by reviewers to determine if there is a risk of bias.
Fair Play: The editor will evaluate the manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or the political philosophy of the authors. The editorial policies of a magazine or series of minutes should promote transparency and the submission of complete and honest reports, and the Editor will ensure that Authors and Reviewers have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. The Editor will use the electronic delivery system of a magazine for all communications and will establish, together with the Editor, a transparent mechanism to appeal against editorial decisions.
Journal or Series Metrics: The Editor will not attempt to influence the classification of a publication or series of acts by artificially increasing any metric. In particular, the Editor will not require references to articles in that (or any other) publication or series to be included, except for genuine academic reasons and Authors should not be required to include references to the articles or products and services of the Editor in which the editor is interested.
Confidentiality: The Editor will protect the confidentiality of all material sent to a journal or procedure, as well as all communications with the Reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant Authors and Reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the Editor may share limited information with the Publishers of other journals when deemed necessary to investigate the suspicion of misconduct in the investigation. For more information, refer to the COPE guidelines on Sharing of Information Among Editors-in-Chief Regarding Possible Misconduct. Unless a journal or procedure uses an open peer review system and / or the Reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, the Editor must protect the identities of the Reviewers. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the investigation of the Editor without the express written consent of the Author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review will be kept confidential and will not be used for personal gain.
Declaration of Competing Interests: Any editorial conflict of potential interest shall be declared to the Editor in writing prior to the appointment of an Editor, and then updated when new conflicts arise. The editor may publish these statements in the journal or series of minutes. The Editor should not participate in decisions about articles that he / she has written himself or that have been written by family members or colleagues, or that relate to products or services in which the Editor is interested. In addition, such presentations will be subject to all the usual procedures of publication, peer review will be handled independently of the relevant Author / Editor and its research groups, and there should be a clear statement to that effect in any published article. . Finally, the Editor will apply the ISRDO Press policy related to the disclosure of possible conflicts of interest by Authors and Reviewers.
Watchfulness over the Published Record: The Editor will work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct along with the Editor. Such measures will generally include contacting the Author of a manuscript and giving due consideration to the respective complaints or claims, but may also include additional communications to the relevant research institutions and bodies. The Editor must make proper use of the Editor's systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism. An editor presented with convincing evidence of misconduct will coordinate with the editor to organize the immediate publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other correction to the published record that may be relevant.