JMVRA Reviewer Policy: Duties & Confidentiality

Reviewers at JMVRA are allocated through a double-blind process, and they must keep confidentiality and disclose any conflict of interest.

3,000+ Reviewer Panel

PhD or Equivalent

Certificate on Request

Becoming a Reviewer

A note on acceptance and publication timing. This is for all acceptance and Publication Time: Specialist reviewers assess your paper, and you receive the acceptance or rejection decision by email and WhatsApp.

The JMVRA panel includes 3000+ expert reviewers drawn from institutions in India and around the world. Researchers who hold a PhD or have equivalent experience may apply by emailing [email protected] with their CV and areas of expertise. A concise CV that highlights relevant publications helps editors match you with suitable manuscripts.

JMVRA's reviewer policy. Eligibility: Subject expertise and publications. Double-blind: Identities hidden both ways. Confidentiality: Manuscripts never shared. Conflicts: Declared before accepting. Constructive reports: Specific, respectful comments. Recognition: Certificates for completed reviews. JMVRA: transparent, double-blind peer review · open access CC BY 4.0 · ISSN 2984-8911 ₹971 INR / $41 USD only after acceptance, up to 5 authors · Crossref DOI on request — Who the reviewers are, what they commit to and how reviews are allocated — tap to enlarge.

Reviewer Obligations

Respond to review invitations, accepting or declining, within 48 hours
Finish reviews inside the agreed time frame (typically 5–7 working days)
Give authors feedback that is objective, specific and constructive
Keep all manuscript content strictly confidential
Declare any conflict of interest and step aside from the review
Do not keep, copy or cite unpublished manuscripts that are under review
Do not approach authors directly while or after reviewing

Reviewer Rights & Benefits

A place in JMVRA's yearly list recognising reviewers
A digital appreciation certificate for active reviewers
Active reviewers can ask for a waiver of the publication fee on their own submissions (subject to editorial approval)
Reviewers who finish 5+ reviews within a year gain priority reviewer status

Reviewer Removal

Reviewers who keep missing deadlines, submit inadequate reviews or breach confidentiality will be taken off the reviewer panel, and JMVRA reserves the right to withdraw reviewer recognition in cases of misconduct.

What Makes a Good Reviewer

Expertise

Familiarity with the subject and methods.

Fairness

Evaluates the work rather than the authors.

Constructiveness

Shows how the paper can be strengthened.

Reliability

Replies quickly and honours commitments.

Reviewers and the Use of AI Tools

A manuscript under review is confidential, so reviewers should neither upload it to public AI tools nor rely on such tools to write the review. Responsibility for the assessment stays with the reviewer. Reviewers who are unsure should ask the editorial office before using any tool.

Read about joining the reviewer team.

Practical Tips for Reviewers Working Under Confidentiality Rules

Good reviewing is a service to authors and editors alike. These habits help you stay confidential, fair and useful, even when your own schedule is crowded.

Decline when conflicted. If you know the authors, compete with them or have strong views on the topic, say so and decline politely. An early refusal is more helpful than a compromised report.
Never share the manuscript. Do not forward files, discuss details with students or paste text into public tools. Confidential material should stay within the review process unless the editor grants permission.
Comment on the work, not the person. Frame criticism around evidence, method and argument, and suggest concrete improvements. Respectful, specific comments are easier for authors to act on than blunt dismissal.
Separate major from minor points. Open your report with a short summary of the paper, then list essential concerns apart from small language or formatting matters, so editors can quickly weigh your recommendation.
Tell the editor about limits. If a section lies outside your expertise, say so plainly. Honest boundaries let the editor seek additional input instead of relying on an overconfident judgement.

Protect the manuscript, declare conflicts early, and write specific, courteous comments that help the editor decide and the author improve.

Questions Researchers Often Ask

Q1. How can I become a JMVRA reviewer?

Researchers holding a PhD or comparable experience may apply by sending their CV and areas of expertise to [email protected].

Q2. Which benefits do JMVRA reviewers get?

Reviewers who stay active are given yearly recognition, a digital appreciation certificate and priority reviewer status, and they can ask for a fee waiver on their own submissions, subject to editorial approval.

Q3. What is the time reviewers have to finish a review?

Invitations are accepted or declined within 48 hours, and the review itself is typically completed in 5–7 working days.

Q4. Are reviewers told whose paper they are assessing?

No, because JMVRA follows a double-blind review model.

Q5. May a reviewer use AI to summarise a manuscript?

No. Placing a confidential manuscript into a public AI tool is a breach of confidentiality.

PreviousCopyright Infringement NextFAQ

At-a-Glance Checklist

Expertise checkedPrior to accepting
Conflicts disclosedEach time
Confidentiality upheldNothing shared or reused
Constructive reportComments that can be acted on
Deadlines honouredOtherwise decline early

How Transparent Peer Review Works, Stage by Stage

SubmissionScreening at the beginning checks plagiarism, layout and whether the paper is within the journal’s scope.
Choosing reviewersAppointments of specialists in the relevant field are made via the Scholar9 portal.
Double-blind reviewFour things are weighed: clarity, significance, method and originality of the paper.
DecisionThe outcome (accept, revise or reject) reaches authors via email and WhatsApp.
RevisionAuthors reply to every comment, dealing with one point at a time.
TransparencyA review record is kept at Scholar9; if you want the report, request it.

Open reports, optional reviewer identity and open participation are the three models of transparency. This is how JMVRA applies them.

Ready to Publish? Submit to JMVRA

2984-8911Online ISSN · publishing since June 2023

11.25Impact factor · from Google Scholar citations

₹971 INR / $41 USDBilled only after an acceptance decision

Double-blind reviewPeer review done transparently

CC BY 4.0Open access without embargo

On requestCrossref DOI

JMVRA is aligned with UGC's Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.

JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.

Submit your paper Author guidelines Email the editor WhatsApp +91 91063 65667

More useful pages at jmvra.org

Key Terms

Subjects and search phrases this article addresses.

reviewer policy reviewer policy journal publication open access publishing peer review process manuscript submission scholarly publishing JMVRA JMVRA.ORG ISSN 2984-8911 open access journal peer reviewed journal multidisciplinary journal research paper publication publish research paper international journal monthly journal UGC CARE journal peer review journal Crossref DOI high impact factor transparent peer review double-blind peer review open peer review refereed journal peer review process steps

Keep Reading on the JMVRA Blog

You are reading part of the JMVRA journal blog, a source of hands-on guidance about publishing, indexing, metrics and research integrity that aims to be verifiable, not promotional.

From the blog