1. General guidelines for peer reviewers
The practice of peer review is to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing. Therefore, the referees adopt a positive, impartial, but critical attitude toward the manuscript under review, with the aim of promoting effective, accurate, and relevant scientific communication. The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the Korean Journal of Veterinary Service. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review. The journal employs single blind review, where the reviewer remains anonymous throughout the process.
- Please consider the following aspects when reviewing a manuscript:
Appropriateness of the approach or experimental design
Appropriateness of the statistical analyses
Adequacy of experimental techniques
Soundness of conclusions and interpretation
Relevance of discussion
Adherence to the Instructions to Authors
Significance to the veterinary hygiene and services
Reviewer’s recommendations are gratefully received by the editor; however, since editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, reviewers should not expect the editor to honor every recommendation. The reviewer will be asked to suggest acceptability as noted on the specific review form (e.g., accept; accept with revision; reject; modify, re-review required; convert to Short-Form).