Reviewer Application Criteria

Reviewer Application Form ─ DOWNLOAD

Last Updated: April 2025

Academics who wish to contribute as reviewers for InnovatioSports Journal are expected to play an active role in the evaluation process with scientific competence and a strong sense of ethical responsibility. This guide has been prepared to provide clear and professional information about the reviewer application process.

REVIEWER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

  • Possess at least a Master’s degree (PhD preferred).

  • Have expertise in areas within the journal's scope.

  • Have published in national or international peer-reviewed journals.

  • Previous reviewing experience is an asset.

  • Adhere to scientific ethical principles and uphold academic integrity.

ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND

  • Academic publications (articles, books, proceedings, etc.)

  • Academic experience at universities or research institutions

  • Participation in or leadership of research projects

REVIEWER APPLICATION FORM

Applicants are expected to provide the following information completely and accurately:

  • Full Name

  • Date of Birth

  • Contact Information (Email, Phone, Address)

  • Highest Academic Degree

  • Areas of Expertise

  • Current Affiliation

  • Key Publications (last 5 years)

  • Previous Reviewing Experience (if any)

  • Statement of ethical compliance

  • Disclosure of any conflicts of interest

  • Preferred subject areas for reviewing (optional)

Confirmation and Signature: A declaration of accuracy and a signature field are included at the end of the form.

Download the reviewer application form here: Reviewer Application Form – DOWNLOAD

REVIEWER APPLICATION PROCESS

  1. Submission of Application: Applications can be submitted online or via email.

  2. Preliminary Review: The editorial team assesses basic eligibility.

  3. Expertise Assessment: Detailed analysis based on subject area compatibility.

  4. Notification of Results: Applicants are informed within 4 weeks.

  5. Assignment: Initial reviewer task and editorial guidance are provided.

REVIEWING ETHICAL GUIDELINES

  • Confidentiality: Manuscript content must not be shared with third parties.

  • Objectivity: Reviews must be impartial and fair.

  • Conflict of Interest: Any potential conflicts must be disclosed.

  • Ethical Compliance: Manuscripts must be assessed for ethical adherence.

EVALUATION CRITERIA

  • Title and Abstract: Do they accurately reflect the manuscript content?

  • Introduction and Objective: Is the study’s purpose clearly stated?

  • Methodology: Are methods appropriate and clearly explained?

  • Findings: Are results presented clearly and logically?

  • Discussion and Conclusion: Are results interpreted well and connected to the literature?

  • References: Are they current and relevant?

STRUCTURE OF THE REVIEW REPORT

  • General Assessment: Summary of strengths and weaknesses

  • Detailed Comments: Section-by-section suggestions

  • Recommendation: Accept / Revise / Reject

We thank you for your valuable contributions to maintaining high quality and ethical standards in scientific publishing.

For inquiries: info@isjournal.org