Peer-Review is an important element in the scientific publication process to ensure the quality of research. Reviewers play a key role in the manuscript review process, our peer review process ensures that only qualified and genuine research should publish. The Encyclopeadic Publishing would like to thank all the individuals who dedicated their considerable time and expertise to the journal by serving as volunteer reviewers .Their generous contribution is deeply appreciated.

1. Receive a discount voucher code entitling you to a reduction in the article processing charge (APC) of a future submission to any Encyclopeadic Publishing. Vouchers issued to specific individuals are not transferable and must be mentioned during the submission procedure. Please note reviewer vouchers must be applied before acceptance. Vouchers can no longer be applied once an APC invoice has been issued.
2. Are included in the journal’s annual acknowledgment of reviewers.
3. Are considered for the journal’s outstanding reviewer award.

Encyclopeadic relies on the time and expertise of volunteer reviewers to maintain its high editorial standards. Manuscripts submitted to Encyclopeadic Publishing journals are reviewed by at least two reviewers. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the quality of the manuscript and to provide a recommendation to the external editor on whether a manuscript can be accepted, requires revisions or should be rejected.

Accept or decline an invitation to review :

1. Accept or decline any invitations quickly, based on the manuscript title and abstract;
2. Suggest alternative reviewers if an invitation must be declined;
3. Request an extension in case more time is required to compose a report

Peer reviewers also have important responsibilities to authors, editors, and readers. Please consider them carefully.

1. Provide an overall recommendation for the publication of the manuscript on its originality, technical quality, significance, contribution, interest to readers, research level, English level, etc.  .
2. To evaluate the manuscript in a constructive way providing a legible insight to author without any controversy.
3. Provide written, unbiased feedback on the scholarly merits and scientific value of the manuscript, together with rationale for your opinion.
4. Avoid personal comments or criticism.
5. Refrain from direct author contact without the editor’s permission.
6. If you come across a case of plagiarism , please do inform the editor.
7. Please aim to submit your review promptly, and please inform the editor as soon as possible if you are not able to submit your review by the deadline.

Every reviewer is required to inform the journal editor if they hold any possiblel conflict of interests if they have personal or professional relationship with the author(s) that might bias their assessment of the manuscript. The editorial office will check as far as possible before invitation, however we appreciate the cooperation of reviewers in this matter. Reviewers who are invited to assess a manuscript they previously reviewed for another journal should not consider this as a conflict of interest in itself. In this case, reviewers should feel free to let us know if the manuscript has been improved or not compared to the previous version.

Reviewers should keep the content of the manuscript, including the abstract, confidential. Reviewers must inform the Editorial Office if they would like a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf.

Encyclopeadic Publishing journals operate single or double blind peer review. Reviewers should be careful not to reveal their identity to the authors, either in their comments or in metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.

Please note that as the reviewer, you will have access to other reviewers' reports via the online submission system after you have submitted your report.

Encyclopeadic Publishing aims to provide an efficient and high quality publishing service to authors and to the scientific community. We ask reviewers to assist by providing review reports in a timely manner. Please contact the editorial office if you require an extension to the review deadline.

All manuscripts sent for publication in our journals are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed by experts (this includes research and review articles, spontaneous submissions, and invited papers). The editors of the journal will conduct a preliminary review of all submitted manuscripts before starting review. The Editorial Office will then organize the peer-review process performed by independent experts and collect at least two review reports per manuscript. We ask our authors for adequate revisions (with a second round of peer-review if necessary) before a final decision is made. The final decision is made by the academic editor (usually the Editor-in-Chief of a journal or the Guest Editor of a Special Issue). Accepted articles are copy-edited and English-edited.

Please note that your recommendation is visible only to journal editors, not to the authors.

Please rate the following aspects of the manuscript:

Originality/Novelty:Is the question original and well defined? Do the results provide an advance in current knowledge?
Significance:Are the results interpreted appropriately? Are they significant? Are all conclusions justified and supported by the results? Are hypotheses and speculations carefully identified as such?
Quality of Presentation:Is the article written in an appropriate way? Are the data and analyses presented appropriately? Are the highest standards for presentation of the results used?
Scientific Soundness:is the study correctly designed and technically sound? Are the analyses performed with the highest technical standards? Are the data robust enough to draw the conclusions? Are the methods, tools, software, and reagents described with sufficient details to allow another researcher to reproduce the results?
Research depth: Is the research effective? Does the work provide an advance towards the current knowledge? Do the authors have addressed an important long-standing question with smart experiments?
Diagrams, figures, tables and captions: Are they essential and clear?
Clarity: Is the writing clear and well-written? Is the article structure reasonable?
English Level:Is the English language appropriate and understandable?

Manuscripts submitted to Encyclopeadic Publishing journals should meet the highest standards of publication ethics:
Manuscripts should only report results that have not been submitted or published before, even in part；manuscripts should be submitted in WORD format.
Manuscripts must be original and should not reuse text from another source without appropriate citation.
For biological studies, the studies reported should have been carried out in accordance with generally accepted ethical research standards

If reviewers become aware of such scientific misconduct or fraud, plagiarism or any other unethical behavior related to the manuscript, they should raise these concerns with the editor immediately.

Please provide detailed and constructive comments in the Electronic Review Form about how the manuscript can improved ,recommendations are provided as follows:

1. Accept : Accept the manuscript without any changes
2. Major Revisions: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments(must explain to the author the revison that is required). Authors are given five days for revisions.
3. Re-review after a thorough revision: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within ten days and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.
3. Re-review after a thorough revision: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within ten days and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.
4. Reject：The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of re-submission to the journal. Please note that your recommendation is visible only to journal editors, not to the authors.

A brief summary(one short paragraph) outlining the aim of the paper and its main contributions.

Broad comments highlighting areas of strength and weakness. These comments should be specific enough for authors to be able to respond.

Specific comments referring to line numbers, tables or figures. Reviewers need not comment on formatting issues that do not obscure the meaning of the paper, as these will be addressed by editors.

Please note that Encyclopeadic Publishing journals follow several standards and guidelines, including those from the ICMJE (medical journals), CONSORT (trial reporting), TOP (data transparency and openness), PRISMA (systematic reviews and meta-analyses) and ARRIVE (reporting of in vivo experiments). See the Publishing Standards and Guidelines page or contact the editorial office for more details. Reviewers familiar with the guidelines should report any concerns they have about their implementation.

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Committee on Publication Ethics.(https://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/ Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf）

Hames, I. Peer Review and Manuscript Management in Scientific Journals: Guidelines for Good Practice. Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2007. (https://www.anu.edu.au/students/academic-skills/writing- assessment）

Writing a journal article review. Australian National University: Canberra, Australia, 2010. (https://www.anu.edu.au/students/academic-skills/writing- assessment）

Golash-Boza, T. How to write a peer review for an academic journal: Six steps from start to finish. (http://www.phd2published.com/2012/05/09/how- to-write-a-peer-review-for-an-academic-journal-six-steps-from-start-to-finish-by-tanya-golash-boza/）

Reviewers may suggest that a manuscript may be more appropriate for publication in another Encyclopeadic Publishing journal. To save time and effort, authors would have the possibility to request the transfer of review reports to another Frontier Scientific Publishing journal. The full list of journals published by Encyclopeadic can be found in our official website: http://www.encyclopub.com/