Become a Reviewer

About Reviewer Participation

Reviewers support the Journal’s external peer-review process by providing independent scholarly assessment within their areas of expertise.

Reviewer participation is based on:

• relevant scholarly and/or methodological expertise;
• independence from the authors and the manuscript;
• absence of material conflicts of interest;
• ability to provide a reasoned and constructive assessment;
• compliance with confidentiality and applicable reviewer ethics;
• availability to complete an accepted review assignment within the applicable timeframe.

Reviewer participation does not create membership in the Editorial Board and does not confer editorial decision-making authority.

Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial process but do not constitute the Journal’s final editorial decision.

Related: Peer Review Process·Review Ethics·Guidelines for Reviewers

Eligibility and Scholarly Expertise

Applicants should demonstrate academic or professional expertise relevant to the Journal’s subject areas and the types of manuscripts they may be invited to assess.

Relevant qualifications may include:

• research experience in an applicable academic discipline;
• a demonstrable scholarly record, normally including publications in peer-reviewed scholarly outlets;
• relevant methodological competence;
• academic, research, or professional experience relevant to potential review assignments;
• sufficient expertise to provide an independent, reasoned, and constructive assessment of scholarly manuscripts.

A doctoral degree, academic title, or other formal qualification may support the assessment of an applicant’s expertise but is not, by itself, a mandatory universal requirement for inclusion in the reviewer pool.

Applicants should provide accurate and verifiable information about their academic or professional background.

Where available, applicants may also provide:

• ORCID iD;
• Web of Science Researcher Profile / ResearcherID;
• Scopus Author ID / Profile;
• Google Scholar or institutional academic profile.

Required Application Materials

Reviewer Application Form

Applicants should complete and sign the official Reviewer Application Form of the International Interdisciplinary Scientific Journal “Expert”.

The form collects information concerning:

• academic and professional background;
• institutional affiliation;
• field of expertise and main research areas;
• methodological expertise;
• scholarly profiles and identifiers;
• previous reviewing or editorial experience, where applicable;
• contact information;
• reviewer declarations and commitments.

Curriculum Vitae (CV)

Applicants should attach an up-to-date academic or professional Curriculum Vitae containing relevant information concerning education and academic qualifications, institutional affiliation and current position, research interests and areas of expertise, relevant publications, research experience, and previous peer-review or editorial experience where applicable.

Supporting Documents

Applicants may also submit additional documents relevant to the assessment of their scholarly or professional expertise. Supporting documents are optional unless specifically requested during assessment of the application.

How to Submit an Application

The completed Reviewer Application Form, Curriculum Vitae, and any applicable supporting documents should be submitted through the APPLICATION FOR JOINING form provided on this page.

The online form functions as the submission interface through which prospective reviewers upload the completed application and accompanying documents.

Multiple supporting files may be uploaded in the formats accepted by the submission form.

Submission of an application does not automatically result in inclusion in the reviewer pool.

Related: Action Algorithm for Prospective Reviewers

Editorial Assessment of the Application

Reviewer applications are considered individually.

The Editorial Office may perform an administrative review of the submitted materials, including verification of completeness, contact information, and the availability of supporting documentation.

Where necessary, additional information or clarification may be requested from the applicant.

Scholarly suitability for potential reviewer participation may be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or appropriate members of the Editorial Board, taking into account field of expertise, research and publication record, methodological competence, relevance to the Journal’s scope, previous reviewing or editorial experience where available, and ability to provide independent scholarly assessment.

The assessment of an application concerns suitability for possible inclusion in the reviewer pool and does not constitute appointment to review any particular manuscript.

Inclusion in the Reviewer Pool

Where an application is approved, the applicant may be added to the Journal’s internal reviewer pool for consideration for future manuscript-specific review invitations.

The reviewer pool is not a permanent collegiate body of the Journal and does not confer membership, editorial authority, or a permanent reviewer appointment.

Inclusion in the reviewer pool:

• confirms that the applicant may be considered for reviewer assignments;
• does not guarantee that any manuscript will be assigned;
• does not create a permanent right to receive review invitations;
• does not confer Editorial Board membership;
• does not confer authority to make final editorial decisions.

Reviewer information may be maintained by the Journal for legitimate editorial administration and reviewer-selection purposes, subject to applicable confidentiality and data-protection requirements.

The Journal may update reviewer information where necessary to maintain accurate records concerning expertise, affiliation, contact details, and reviewer availability.

Reviewer Pool vs Manuscript-Specific Appointment

Inclusion in the reviewer pool and appointment to review a specific manuscript are separate stages.

For each manuscript, reviewers are selected or approved in accordance with the Journal’s Editorial Policies and Peer Review Process.

A manuscript-specific reviewer invitation takes into account:

• relevant subject expertise;
• methodological suitability;
• independence;
• absence of material conflicts of interest;
• availability to complete the review;
• other factors relevant to a fair and competent assessment.

Before accepting a specific review assignment, the invited reviewer must consider whether they have sufficient expertise, are free from conflicts of interest that could compromise independent assessment, can maintain confidentiality, and can complete the review within the applicable timeframe.

Where any of these conditions cannot be met, the reviewer should decline the invitation or promptly inform the Journal.

Related: Peer Review Process·Editorial Policies·Review Ethics

Reviewer Responsibilities and Ethical Commitments

By applying for inclusion in the reviewer pool, applicants acknowledge that any future review assignment must be conducted in accordance with the Journal’s applicable reviewer requirements.

Reviewers are expected to:

• provide objective, reasoned, and constructive scholarly assessment;
• evaluate only manuscripts within their area of sufficient competence;
• maintain confidentiality before, during, and after the review process;
• disclose relevant conflicts of interest;
• avoid using unpublished manuscript content for personal, professional, or competitive advantage;
• comply with the Journal’s double-blind peer-review model;
• comply with the Journal’s Review Ethics and Guidelines for Reviewers;
• comply with the Journal’s Generative AI Policy.

Related: Review Ethics·Guidelines for Reviewers·Generative AI Policy

Before You Submit

By submitting a reviewer application, the applicant confirms that:

• the information provided is accurate and current;
• the submitted documents genuinely reflect the applicant’s academic and professional background;
• the application is submitted for consideration for inclusion in the Journal’s reviewer pool;
• submission of the application does not guarantee inclusion in the reviewer pool;
• inclusion in the reviewer pool does not guarantee future manuscript assignments;
• each manuscript-specific invitation must be considered separately with regard to expertise, independence, conflicts of interest, confidentiality, and availability;
• if invited to review a manuscript, the applicant agrees to comply with the Journal’s applicable reviewer ethics, peer-review procedures, confidentiality requirements, and Generative AI Policy;
• the applicant will inform the Journal of material changes to affiliation, contact information, or professional circumstances relevant to reviewer selection.