Reviewer’s Guidelines

Iraqi Laser Scientists Journal Reviewer’s Guidelines

The reviewer shares in:

assisting the editorial board in making the decision, must read and evaluate the article in certain specialty and provide the editor with a respectful, constructive, and honest view, discussing the points of strengths and weaknesses of the article, ways to improve the strength and quality of the work, and lessen it`s weakness.
so ; if a reviewer found himself unqualified to review an article or that a fair review will be impossible should notify the editor and excusing from the reviewing. If the article wanted to be reviewed don`t match the expertise of the referee , i.e. receiving an article that covers a topic that does not sufficiently match your area of expertise, please reject the review request from your profile.
has the reviewer enough time to review the article within the time given to him, if no , the editor should know with a suggestion of an alternate one , if the reviewer have agreed to review the article but need more time he must contact the editor as soon as possible.
confidential reviewing of the article, showing the information come in to those authorized by the editor only.
fair management of the articles is necessary , quibbling of an article is not acceptable, the reviewer supposed to express their views with supporting arguments.
the reviewer should not consider an article they reviewing as a conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connections with the authors or their institutions.

Reviewing Process

For reviewing an article, the following should be kept in mind:

content , quality and originality , is the article bring out something new, with originality and high quality.
is the article in line with the aims and scope of the journal.
layout and format , is the author/s follow the guidelines of the journal.
organization and clarity.
is the title describe the article including the most important keywords.
is the abstract explain clearly the content of the article.
the introduction must show what the author hope to gain from the study , in addition to the previous works and findings.
the introduction must show what the author hope to gain from the study , in addition to the previous works and findings.
the author/s must explain the ways of data collecting, identifying the procedures followed , was the sampling appropriate , have the equipment and materials been adequately described and used, has the author/s been precise in describing measurements.
statistical errors are common so attention should be paid.
results in which should the author mentioned what is newly found in the study, should be laid out in a clear and logic sequence , appropriate analysis should be used, in case of uncomfortable statistics , the article should be send to an expert in mathematics and statistics.
discussion and conclusions , looking for reasonable claims supported by the results, the findings must go on with what the author/s expected. Also the conclusions interpreted if adequately tie together the other elements of the paper. Is the study agreed or conflict with previous ones.
graphics (figures, images) and tables , should be adequately examined, are they necessary as a part of the text and illustrated something which need to be clarify , also the referees also note if they are easy to be understand by the readers and presented correctly.
the English must be easy to understand the author’s argument, in case of native or difficult language , the reviewer/s don`t correct the it but advise it as part of the review, in extreme cases where original contribution is undermined by poor quality of , the referee should advise the editor to send the article for language correction.

Reviewing Evaluation`s Report

Iraqi Laser Scientists Journal Reviewer’s Guidelines

The reviewer shares in:

has the reviewer enough time to review the article within the time given to him, if no , the editor should know with a suggestion of an alternate one , if the reviewer have agreed to review the article but need more time he must contact the editor as soon as possible.

confidential reviewing of the article, showing the information come in to those authorized by the editor only.

fair management of the articles is necessary , quibbling of an article is not acceptable, the reviewer supposed to express their views with supporting arguments.

the reviewer should not consider an article they reviewing as a conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other connections with the authors or their institutions.

Reviewing Process

For reviewing an article, the following should be kept in mind:

content , quality and originality , is the article bring out something new, with originality and high quality.

is the article in line with the aims and scope of the journal.

layout and format , is the author/s follow the guidelines of the journal.

organization and clarity.

is the title describe the article including the most important keywords.

is the abstract explain clearly the content of the article.

the introduction must show what the author hope to gain from the study , in addition to the previous works and findings.

the introduction must show what the author hope to gain from the study , in addition to the previous works and findings.

the author/s must explain the ways of data collecting, identifying the procedures followed , was the sampling appropriate , have the equipment and materials been adequately described and used, has the author/s been precise in describing measurements.

statistical errors are common so attention should be paid.

results in which should the author mentioned what is newly found in the study, should be laid out in a clear and logic sequence , appropriate analysis should be used, in case of uncomfortable statistics , the article should be send to an expert in mathematics and statistics.

discussion and conclusions , looking for reasonable claims supported by the results, the findings must go on with what the author/s expected. Also the conclusions interpreted if adequately tie together the other elements of the paper. Is the study agreed or conflict with previous ones.

graphics (figures, images) and tables , should be adequately examined, are they necessary as a part of the text and illustrated something which need to be clarify , also the referees also note if they are easy to be understand by the readers and presented correctly.