AOSIS values peer review as a critical pillar of scholarly publishing. Peer review enables research to be evaluated and constructively critiqued by independent experts within the same academic field as the authors. This rigorous process not only enhances the quality and clarity of manuscripts but also assists the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editors, and Guest Editors in determining a manuscript’s suitability for publication.
If you are interested in joining our reviewer database, please register on the journal’s platform and submit a support enquiry via the ‘Connect’ option in the left-hand menu. As part of our reviewer vetting process, we will review your ORCID profile to assess your suitability. Please ensure that your ORCID profile is up to date and that all relevant information is visible under the public view without restrictions. This process enables us to match you with suitable manuscripts and contributes to building a strong, diverse, and expert peer review community.
All correspondence with reviewers is conducted via email. To ensure smooth communication and accurate reviewer assignment, please keep your user profile on the designated journal platform up to date. This includes: (a) your current email address, (b) reviewing interests and areas of expertise, and (c) cell phone number. It is also advised that your ORCID profile contains the latest information, as it is regularly checked to confirm reviewer identities.
Reviewer Policies
We encourage all reviewers to familiarise themselves with our peer review publishing policies, which cover: (a) criteria for publication, (b) composition of review panels, (c) the peer review process, (d) review timelines, and (e) guidelines for writing constructive, respectful, and thorough reviews.
To guide our reviewers, two valuable resources are available:
This journal employs a double-anonymous peer review model, in line with ASSAf’s Code of Best Practice in Scholarly Journal Publishing, Editing and Peer Review. Manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by editorial staff before assignment to the Editor-in-Chief (or delegated Section or Guest Editors) to two independent expert reviewers. Please note that the journal does not support Open Peer Review.
Reviewer Invitations
Review invitations are sent via email from the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor, or Guest Editor. Each invitation includes the manuscript abstract to help you decide whether to accept the review request. The email contains a direct access link to the journal platform, where you can indicate your acceptance or decline. Full-text access to the manuscript (and any supplementary files) is only granted after you accept the invitation.
Accepting or Declining Invitations
Please respond promptly by clicking the appropriate button in the invitation email and confirming your decision. If you are unable to review, we appreciate early notice so the editorial team can assign an alternative reviewer. You are welcome to suggest or nominate a qualified colleague for us to consider. If so, please supply their full name, affiliation, and contact information so that we may reach out to them directly to confirm their availability. Please do not share the manuscript or its contents with anyone unless the publisher has formally assigned them as a reviewer.
Review Deadline
Please submit your review by the specified due date. If you anticipate a delay, contact the editorial office as early as possible to request an extension.
Declaration of Competing Interests
To maintain integrity and transparency, reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest—whether financial, professional, or personal—related to the manuscript. Refer to our full Competing Interests Policy for more information.
Submitting Your Review
All reviewing tasks (e.g., accessing manuscripts, submitting reports, and communicating with editors) are managed through the journal’s online platform. Should you experience technical issues, contact the journal office for support.
Reviewer reports are strictly confidential. They are shared only with the authors of the designated manuscript after an editorial decision has been made. Reports are not published publicly. This protects the double-anonymous process and ensures that feedback remains constructive and focused.
Use of AI in Reviews
Reviewers must not upload, copy, or input any portion of an unpublished manuscript into AI tools, including generative AI or machine learning platforms. Doing so may breach confidentiality agreements and violate copyright. If AI assistance is used in writing your review report, this must be disclosed to the editor (e.g., just as co-reviewer contributions must be declared). Reviewers are encouraged to familiarise themselves with the AOSIS AI Use Policy to ensure responsible and transparent use of AI tools during the peer review process
Maintaining Double-Anonymity
To uphold the journal’s double-anonymous review model, please ensure your identity is not revealed in the content or metadata of your review:
If you successfully complete a manuscript review, your name will be listed in the Reviewer Acknowledgement publication of the relevant volume, published in the current or following year. This serves to recognise your valuable scholarly contribution.