Reviewers must provide impartial evaluations based on the scientific and scholarly content of the manuscript. Personal opinions about the authors must not influence the review.

Review comments should be respectful, professional, specific, and constructive. Offensive, discriminatory, humiliating, or unnecessarily aggressive language is inappropriate.

Reviewers should identify important published work that has been omitted when relevant. Any citation recommendation should be based on genuine scholarly relevance and should not be intended to artificially increase citations.

Reviewers must not request unnecessary citations to their own publications, the publications of colleagues, or the journal solely to increase citation counts or journal metrics.

Reviewers must not use ideas, data, methods, findings, or other unpublished information obtained through peer review for their own research or professional advantage.

Reviewers should promptly notify the editor if they identify credible concerns regarding plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, unethical research, manipulated citations, or other forms of research or publication misconduct.

Reviewers should not allow relationships, competition, institutional interests, financial considerations, or personal beliefs to compromise their assessment.

By accepting a review assignment, reviewers acknowledge their responsibility to provide a careful, timely, ethical, and academically useful assessment.