Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of the Journal of Computer and Data Science (JCODA). Through the peer-review process, reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and help authors improve the quality, clarity, and scientific value of their manuscripts.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer-review process supports editors in evaluating the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based recommendations that assist editors in making publication decisions.

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on:

Promptness

Reviewers are expected to contribute to an efficient and timely publication process by:

• Responding promptly to review invitations.
• Informing the editor if they cannot complete the review within the requested timeframe.
• Declining review assignments when they lack sufficient expertise to evaluate the manuscript adequately.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

• Share manuscripts with others without editorial permission.
• Discuss manuscript content with unauthorized individuals.
• Use unpublished information for personal research, professional advantage, or any other purpose.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, fairly, professionally, and respectfully.

• Provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
• Focus on scientific content rather than personal criticism.
• Explain recommendations and concerns in sufficient detail.
• Avoid offensive, defamatory, discriminatory, or inappropriate language.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and assist in improving the completeness of the scholarly record.

• Recommend important references when appropriate.
• Notify editors of substantial similarity to other known publications.
• Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline review assignments if they have conflicts of interest arising from:

• Personal relationships with authors.
• Academic collaborations with authors.
• Financial interests related to the research.
• Institutional affiliations that may compromise impartiality.
• Any circumstance that could influence independent judgment.

Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers should assist the journal in identifying possible ethical issues, including:

Any concerns regarding research integrity should be reported confidentially to the editor.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscript content to public AI systems or third-party tools that may compromise confidentiality, copyright, intellectual property rights, or data protection requirements.

Recommendation Categories

Reviewers may recommend one of the following editorial decisions:

The final publication decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board.

Commitment to Quality