๐Ÿ“š Welcome to RSYN PRESS - Open Access Academic Publishing | Lowest APC | Submit Your Manuscript Today!
RSYN PRESS Logo RSYN PRESS

RSYN PRESS

Open Access Books & Scholarly Publishing Platform

Disseminating knowledge for research and innovation through peer-reviewed academic publications.

Peer Review Excellence

Reviewer Guidelines

Join our distinguished community of peer reviewers and help maintain the highest standards of academic publishing. Your expertise shapes the future of scholarly communication.

Expert
Community
Double-Blind
Review Process
3-4 Week
Review Period

Why Review for RSYN PRESS?

Join a community of distinguished scholars making a real impact on academic publishing

Recognition

Annual reviewer recognition and certificates

Networking

Connect with leading researchers globally

Early Access

First look at cutting-edge research

Development

Enhance your academic skills

The Role of a Reviewer

As a peer reviewer, you are part of a community dedicated to advancing scholarly knowledge and maintaining academic integrity.

Your Impact

Your constructive, honest, and timely feedback helps authors improve their work and assists our editors in making informed publication decisions. You shape the future of academic discourse in your field.

Professional Growth

Reviewing manuscripts keeps you at the forefront of research developments, improves your own writing, and builds valuable professional connections within the academic community.

Quality Assurance

You serve as a guardian of academic quality, ensuring that published research meets the highest standards of methodology, originality, and scholarly contribution.

Review Process Steps

A comprehensive guide to our peer review workflow

1

Invitation & Acceptance

Receive review invitation via email with manuscript details. Consider your expertise, availability, and potential conflicts of interest before accepting.

Check Expertise

Does the manuscript align with your research area?

Assess Availability

Can you complete within 3-4 weeks?

Check Conflicts

Any personal or professional conflicts?

2

Initial Reading & Assessment

Conduct an initial read-through to understand the manuscript's scope, methodology, and contribution to the field.

Key Questions to Consider:

  • โ€ข Is the research question clearly defined and significant?
  • โ€ข Are the methods appropriate and well-described?
  • โ€ข Do the conclusions follow from the results?
  • โ€ข Is the writing clear and well-organized?
3

Detailed Review & Documentation

Conduct thorough evaluation and document your findings using our structured review format.

For Authors

  • โ€ข Constructive feedback
  • โ€ข Specific suggestions
  • โ€ข Clear recommendations

For Editors

  • โ€ข Confidential comments
  • โ€ข Final recommendation
  • โ€ข Quality assessment
4

Submit Review & Follow-up

Submit your comprehensive review through our system and be available for clarifications if needed.

3-4 weeks
Available for follow-up

Review Report Structure

Follow this comprehensive template for effective reviews

1 Executive Summary

  • โ€ข Brief overview of the manuscript's aims
  • โ€ข Summary of main findings and conclusions
  • โ€ข Your overall assessment (2-3 sentences)
  • โ€ข Recommendation preview

2 Strengths & Weaknesses

  • โ€ข Major strengths of the work
  • โ€ข Significant weaknesses or limitations
  • โ€ข Overall contribution to the field
  • โ€ข Novelty and originality assessment

3 Detailed Comments

  • โ€ข Numbered, specific comments
  • โ€ข Methodology and design issues
  • โ€ข Data analysis and interpretation
  • โ€ข Writing clarity and organization

4 Technical Assessment

  • โ€ข Statistical methods appropriateness
  • โ€ข Data quality and sufficiency
  • โ€ข Figures and tables evaluation
  • โ€ข Reference completeness and accuracy

5 Recommendations

Accept
Minor Revisions
Major Revisions
Reject

6 Confidential Editor Comments

  • โ€ข Concerns not shared with authors
  • โ€ข Detailed reasoning for recommendation
  • โ€ข Suggestions for editorial decision
  • โ€ข Priority level assessment

Ethical Responsibilities

Upholding the highest standards of academic integrity

Confidentiality

The review process is strictly confidential. Manuscripts and related materials must never be shared, discussed, or used for personal research purposes.

Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively, free from personal bias. Focus on the research merit, not personal opinions about authors or institutions.

Constructive Feedback

Provide professional, courteous feedback aimed at improving the manuscript. Personal criticism or unprofessional language is never acceptable.

Timeliness

Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe. If delays are unavoidable, notify the editorial office immediately to avoid holding up the publication process.

Conflict Disclosure

Immediately disclose any conflicts of interest, including personal, professional, or financial relationships that could bias your review.

Research Integrity

Report any suspected misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or ethical violations, to the editorial office immediately.

Reviewer Resources

Tools and support to help you provide excellent reviews

Review Template

Download our structured review template to ensure comprehensive evaluation

Download Template

Training Materials

Access video tutorials and guides for effective peer review

Watch Training

Editorial Support

Get help from our editorial team throughout the review process

Contact Support

Ready to Join Our Reviewer Community?

Become part of our distinguished network of peer reviewers and help shape the future of academic publishing in your field.