The Journal of Organic and Inorganic Chemistry (JOIC) relies on a dedicated and expert team of reviewers to maintain the quality, integrity, and scientific rigor of published research. Reviewers play a critical role in evaluating the originality, validity, and clarity of manuscripts submitted to the journal.

1. Reviewer Responsibilities

• Objective Evaluation: Assess manuscripts fairly, focusing solely on scientific content, originality, methodology, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
• Confidentiality: Treat all manuscript content, data, and author information as strictly confidential. Do not share or discuss manuscripts with others without prior authorization.
• Timeliness: Complete reviews within the requested timeframe to support an efficient editorial process.

2. Review Criteria

When reviewing a manuscript, please consider:

1. Relevance and Scope: Does the work align with the aims of JOIC and contribute to the field of organic and inorganic chemistry?
2. Originality: Is the research novel and does it provide new insights or methods?
3. Methodology: Are the experimental or computational methods appropriate, clearly described, and reproducible?
4. Data and Analysis: Are the results accurately presented and interpreted? Are figures, tables, and supplementary materials clear and informative?
5. Ethical Compliance: Are there any concerns regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical treatment of humans/animals?
6. Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript well-organized, with a logical flow, clear language, and correct references?

3. Review Process

• JOIC follows a double-blind peer review system, ensuring that author and reviewer identities are confidential.
• Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, detailed, and actionable feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts.
• Each review should include a recommendation to the editor: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

4. Conflict of Interest

• Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest, including personal, financial, or professional relationships with the authors or competing interests that may bias the review.
• If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the invitation to review the manuscript.

5. Reviewer Etiquette

• Provide feedback in a respectful and professional manner. Avoid derogatory or personal comments.
• Focus on scientific content and clarity, not the perceived reputation of the authors or institutions.
• Suggest improvements for methodology, discussion, or presentation where appropriate.

6. Recognition

• Reviewers are acknowledged for their contributions to JOIC, and their efforts support the advancement of scientific knowledge. Certificates of review and acknowledgment may be provided upon request.

✉️ For any questions or guidance regarding the review process, reviewers may contact: editorialoffice@sciconx.org