Review Guidelines

These Review Guidelines are provided to assist reviewers in conducting objective, rigorous, and ethical evaluations of manuscripts submitted to Accounting Crystal Word. The journal adheres to international best practices and COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers are expected to follow the principles outlined below when assessing assigned manuscripts.

1. Confidentiality

  • Manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential documents.

  • Reviewers may not share, distribute, or discuss the manuscript with others without explicit permission from the Editor.

  • Information obtained during the review process must not be used for personal, academic, or professional advantage.

2. Objectivity and Professionalism

  • Reviews must be conducted objectively, with scholarly rigor and without personal bias.

  • Criticisms should be expressed clearly, constructively, and supported by evidence.

  • Reviewers should avoid derogatory language or personal remarks directed at the authors.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript based on the following aspects:

a. Originality and Contribution

b. Relevance and Alignment

c. Methodological Rigor

d. Theoretical Foundation

e. Clarity and Organization

f. Findings and Interpretation

g. Ethical Compliance

4. Constructive Feedback

  • Reviewers should provide actionable, specific, and constructive comments to help authors improve their manuscript.

  • Comments should be delivered respectfully and focused on academic quality.

5. Conflict of Interest

  • Reviewers must declare any personal, financial, academic, or professional conflicts of interest.

  • Reviewers should decline the assignment if any conflict may bias the review.

  • Conflicts may include relationships with authors, competitive interests, or overlapping research.

6. Timeliness

  • Reviews are expected to be completed within the timeframe set by the editorial office (typically 2–4 weeks).

  • Reviewers must inform the editor promptly if additional time is required.

  • Reviewers who feel unqualified or unable to complete the review should decline the request early.

7. Ethical and Responsible Conduct

  • Reviewers must uphold publication ethics at all times.

  • Any suspected ethical issues (plagiarism, fabrication, duplicate submission, unethical research) must be reported to the editor.

  • Reviewers must not discuss or share the manuscript outside the review system.

  • Anonymity in the double-blind review process must be maintained.

8. Communication with the Editorial Office

  • All communication must occur through the OJS system.

  • Reviewers must not contact authors directly.

  • Any concerns or uncertainties should be communicated to the editor for clarification.