REVIEWERS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Faculty Members / Research Scholars / Scientists / Professionals / Experts are invited to join IJARIDEA’s Reviewer Board to ensure quality of publication and to better serve the peers in academic circle.
The minimum sets of qualifications for being a member of Reviewer Board member of IJARIDEA are listed below:
- Should be a PhD degree holder from a recognized university.
- Should have a minimum of 10 years of experience for those who do not have a PhD degree.
- Should be an author with a minimum of 6 publications in reputed National/International Journals.
- Should have valid Researcher ID
- Should have valid ORCID ID
Researchers/Learned Scholars can send this completely filled IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member form along with their ORCID ID, Researcher ID and detailed CV to editor.ijaridea@gmail.com
NOTE:
- To express interest to becoming a Reviewer Board member of IJARIDEA, Faculty Members/Research Scholars / Scientists / Professionals / Experts are advised to send their completely filled IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member form along with their ORCID ID, Researcher ID and detailed CV to editor.ijaridea@gmail.com . Incomplete Applications or Application without IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member form, Researcher ID and ORCID ID cannot be considered.
- IJARIDEA reserves the right to remove any Reviewer Board Member if in anytime their information is found to be false or their services do not Comply to IJARIDEA’s Code of Conduct
- The manuscript (or its existence) should not be shown to, disclosed to, or discussed with others, except in special cases, where specific scientific advice may be sought; in that event the editor must be informed and the identities of those consulted disclosed. Information acquired by a reviewer from such a paper is not available for disclosure or citation until the paper is published
- Destroy/erase the manuscript and to inform the editor should they be unqualified to review the manuscript, or lack the time to review the manuscript, without undue delay.
- To judge the manuscript objectively and in a timely fashion: Referees should not make personal criticism in their reviews.
- To inform the editor if there is a conflict of interest: Specifically, reviewers should not review manuscripts authored or co-authored by a person with whom the referee has a close personal or professional relationship, if this relationship could be reasonably thought to bias the review.
- To respect the intellectual independence of authors.
- To explain and support their judgements so that editors and authors may understand the basis of their comments, and to provide reference to published work, where appropriate.
- To inform the editor of any similarity between the submitted manuscript and another either published or under consideration by another journal.
- To ensure that all unpublished data, information, interpretation and discussion in a submitted article remain confidential and not to use reported work in unpublished, submitted articles for their own research.
- To alert the editor if a manuscript contains or appears to contain plagiarized material, falsified or manipulated data.
- Not to retain or copy the submitted manuscript in any form; to comply with data protection regulations, as appropriate.
- Information on the scope and standards of each journal can be found in the Author Guidelines. Reviewers should aim to submit their reports in a timely fashion: the suggested deadline for receipt of the report is specified in the invitation email. Reviewers should inform the editor as soon as possible if submitting the report by the deadline is not feasible.
- When making a recommendation, reviewers should assess the overall suitability of the article for the journal in relation to the subject and impact of the work, and they should comment on whether the designated article type is appropriate. Major concerns that would prohibit publication should be clearly distinguished from minor concerns that can be addressed by the authors prior to publication.
- It is not necessary to highlight specific errors in the use of language or grammar except where this significantly impacts the understanding of the science. The editor should be informed if a manuscript features work which closely resembles that reported in other publications, or duplicates text and/or figures from published articles.
- Titles should reflect the content and contain terms that would improve the discoverability of the paper. Summaries should preferably be self-contained, so that they can be understood without reference to the main text.
- The length of an article should be commensurate with its scientific content. Although short papers are acceptable, IJARIDEA strongly discourages the fragmentation of a substantial body of work into a number of short publications; such fragmentation is likely to be grounds for rejection.
- The reviewer should consider the novelty of the work and the advance shown over previous studies. In the event of a manuscript lacking sufficient novelty or being incremental in nature, publications should be cited in support of this in the reviewer’s report.
- All scientific work should be performed in a rigorous manner, and any concerns about the level of scientific rigour should be highlighted to the editor, fully explaining the concerns.
- It should be clearly understood that reviewers' reports are made in confidence to the editor, at whose discretion comments will be transmitted to the author. To assist the editor, reviewers are requested to indicate which comments are designed only for consideration, as distinct from those which, in the reviewer's view, require specific action or an adequate answer before the paper is accepted.
- Reviewers may ask for sight of supporting data not submitted for publication, or for sight of a previous paper which has been submitted but not yet published. Such requests must be made to the editor, not directly to the author, and the editor will contact the author on behalf of the reviewer.
- If the reviewer considers a manuscript to be polemical in nature then the editor should be alerted. The author of the paper being criticized will be sent a copy of the manuscript and be given the opportunity to respond.
Also visit: Editorial Board
ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES:
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:
IJARIDEA journal should be informed of any significant conflict of interest that editors, authors or reviewers may have, in order to determine if any action may be appropriate (such as adding a declaration of an author’s conflict of interest to a published piece, or disqualifying a reviewer). Conflicts of interest are almost inevitable and it is not intended to attempt to eliminate these. Editors, authors and reviewers of a manuscript should inform IJARIDEA of any significant financial interest - recent, present or anticipated - in any organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of the piece (for example, employment by such an organization; funds for research; funds for a member of staff; fees for consulting; stock or share holdings; patent interests). If you have such an interest, you may have a conflict of interest, which should be declared.
OTHER INTERESTS:
An editor, author or reviewer may wish to disclose to the editor a conflict of interest that would be embarrassing if it became generally known (for example, an academic link or rivalry or a close relationship with, or a strong antipathy to, a person whose interests may be affected by publication of a manuscript).
ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES:
CONFIDENTIALITY OF MANUSCRIPT:
REVIEWING PROCEDURE:
The reviewers' reports constitute recommendations to the appropriate editor, who takes the final action on manuscripts submitted. The reviewer should consider the work and assess its suitability for the journal to which it has been submitted using the general guidance provided in this section and the details to be found in the Author Guidelines.
In cases where reviewers are unable to assess the manuscript, the editor would welcome suggestions of alternative reviewers who may be able to assess the manuscript. In such instances, the reviewer should provide details of the alternative reviewer and the editor will send an invitation to review the manuscript. Reviewers should decline the invitation to review if there is any conflict of interest. If the reviewer has any ethical concerns regarding the work or the authorship then these must be brought to the attention of the editor.
The editor is responsible for all administrative and executive actions, and can accept or reject papers. Once a manuscript has been revised by the authors then it is the editor's duty to see that, as far as possible, agreement is reached between the authors and reviewers. The reviewers may need to be consulted again concerning an author's reply to comments, but further review is only undertaken when necessary.
ADJUDICATION:
If there is a notable discrepancy between the reports of the two reviewers, or if the difference between authors and reviewers cannot be resolved readily, a senior reviewer may be appointed as adjudicator. The role of the adjudicator is to consider the initial reports and provide a final decision on the manuscript based on these reports (and author comments where they exist) and their own thoughts on the manuscript.
APPEAL PROCESS:
When a paper is recommended for rejection, the editor will inform the authors. Authors have the right to appeal to the editor if they regard the decision to reject as unfair. Appeals are granted at the discretion of the editor. In such cases the editor will request a letter detailing the reason for appeal, as well as a full response to the reviewers’ reports. The manuscript will then be sent to a senior reviewer who has not previously evaluated the manuscript and who will offer a final opinion on the manuscript.
REVIEWER ANONYMITY:
The anonymity of reviewers is strictly preserved from the authors, and reports should be expressed in terms that do not disclose the identity of the writer. A reviewer should never communicate directly with an author, unless and until such action has been sanctioned by IJARIDEA through the editor.
REVIEW REQUIREMENTS:
REVIEWER BOARD MEMBERS:
-
Name Dr.Arshad Shareef Designation Assistant Professor Department Department of Computer Science & Engineering Institution Arkay College of Engineering & Technology,Telangana,India ORCID ID 0000-0002-7439-823X Researcher ID M-5923-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R0106 Email ID arshad_shareef323@yahoo.co.in Skills and Expertise Network Security & Artificial Intelligence Manuscripts Reviewed 6 -
Name Dr.Latha.R Designation Associate Professor Department Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering Institution Christ University,Bangalore-560074,Karnataka, India ORCID ID 0000-0002-9874-3341 Researcher ID N-3893-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R1201 Email ID lathagopal26@gmail.com Skills and Expertise VLSI, Low Power VLSI Multirate DSP, Embedded Systems, Reconfigurable Architecture & FPGA Manuscripts Reviewed 8 -
Name Dr.T.R.Ganesh Babu Designation Professor Department Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering Institution Muthayammal Engineering College,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R0721 Email ID ganeshbabutr@gmail.com Skills and Expertise Bio Signal Processing, Medical Image Processing Manuscripts Reviewed 5 -
Name Dr.Uttam Kumar Roy Designation Assistant Professor Department Department of Information Technology Institution Jadavpur University,Kolkata-700098,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R2125 Email ID royuttam@gmail.com Skills and Expertise Java,Web Technology Manuscripts Reviewed 1 -
Name Dr.B.Shankar Nayak Designation Assistant Professor Department Department of Computer Science and Engineering Institution JNTUH,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R1911 Email ID bsnaik546@gmail.com Skills and Expertise Software Architecture, Data Mining Manuscripts Reviewed 1 -
Name Dr.M.K.Marichelvam Designation Assistant Professor Department Department of Mechanical Engineering Institution Mepco Schlenk Engineering College,Mepco Nagar, Sivakasi – 626 005,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R1313 Email ID mkmarichelvamme@gmail.com Skills and Expertise Soft Computing,Production and Operations Management, Mechanical Engineering. Manuscripts Reviewed 1 -
Name Dr.Vootukuri Pandurangadu Designation Rector & Professor of Mechanical Engineering Department Department of Mechanical Engineering Institution Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University,Anantapur 515002,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R2221 Email ID pandurangaduv@yahoo.com Skills and Expertise Internal combustion Engines and Heat Transfer Manuscripts Reviewed 2 -
Name Dr. Narendhirakannan R. T. Designation Assistant Professor (SG) Department Department of Biotechnology Institution School of Biotechnology and Health Sciences,Karunya University,Coimbatore – 641 114,Tamil Nadu, India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R1414 Email ID bionaren_phd@yahoo.co.in Skills and Expertise Medical Biochemistry, Arthritis, Diabetes, Medicinal plant therapeutics Manuscripts Reviewed 3 -
Name Dr.K Nirmalkumar Designation Professor Department Department of Civil Engineering Institution Kongu Engineering College, Perundurai, Erode District, Tamilnadu- 638052,India ORCID ID 0000-0001-6979-584X Researcher ID H-6799-2016 IJARIDEA Reviewer Board Member ID 0910-0118-0904-0501-R1418 Email ID nirmal2555080@yahoo.co.in Skills and Expertise Concrete Technology & Structural Engineering Manuscripts Reviewed 1
