For Reviewers

Guidelines for Reviewers

Timeliness: a reviewer who does not feel adequate for the proposed task, or who is unable to complete the evaluation of the proposed contribution in the time allowed must promptly inform the Editor who coordinates the review process.

Confidentiality: each paper assigned must be considered confidential. Therefore, they must not be discussed with others without the explicit permission of the editors.

Display of the text: reviewers undertake to accurately indicate the bibliographical references of fundamental works that may have been overlooked by the author, and also to point out any similarities or overlaps between the text received for reviewing and other works known to them.

Conflict of interest and disclosure: information obtained during the peer review process must be considered confidential, and may not be used for personal purposes. The reviewer shall not accept articles for which a conflict of interest exists, due to previous collaboration or competition with the author and/or their institution.

Objectivity: peer review must be conducted in an objective manner. Any personal judgement about the authors of contributions is considered inappropriate. Manuscripts are assessed on the basis of a thorough review form that takes into account their relevance, importance, originality, quality, and clarity of presentation. Reviewers are required to adequately justify their decisions. Each reviewer submits a judgement for each of these areas, as well as an overall judgement.

Scientific Review Form in English

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers are responsible for providing a qualified and timely assessment of the quality and merits of the manuscript. The reviewer is particularly concerned with the originality of the manuscript. The review must be objective. The reviewers' judgement must be clear and reasoned.

Reviewers assess the manuscript for adherence to the journal profile, the relevance of the topic under investigation and the methods applied, the scientific relevance of the information presented in the manuscript, the style of presentation, and the theoretical apparatus. The review has a standard format.

The reviewer must not have a conflict of interest with the authors. If a conflict exists, the reviewer must promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief. The reviewer does not agree to evaluate manuscripts outside the field of their full competence.

Reviewers should alert the Editor-in-Chief to any well-founded suspicion or knowledge of possible violations of ethical standards by authors.

Reviewers should improve the quality of the manuscript through their suggestions. If they recommend correction of the manuscript before publication, they must specify how this can be achieved. They may recommend specific references for citation, but should not cite articles published in Effetti di Lettura / Effects of Reading unless justified.

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not use unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts without the express written consent of the authors.