Reviewer Guidelines

These guidelines are designed to help reviewers provide constructive and thorough evaluations of manuscripts submitted to Vijjacariya: Journal of Buddhist Thought and Education. Your role as a reviewer is vital to ensuring the publication of high-quality research that contributes meaningfully to the field.

1. Confidentiality

  • Keep all manuscript details confidential. Do not share, discuss, or use any part of the manuscript for personal purposes.

2. Impartiality

  • Provide an unbiased and fair assessment. Evaluate the manuscript solely based on its academic merit, regardless of the authors' identities or affiliations.
  • If a conflict of interest is identified, notify the editor and recuse yourself if necessary.

3. Timeliness

  • Adhere to the review deadline. If you need an extension or cannot complete the review, inform the editor promptly.

4. Evaluation Criteria

  • Originality: Assess whether the manuscript presents original research or ideas that contribute new knowledge to the field.
  • Methodology: Review the soundness and appropriateness of the research methods used. Ensure that the study design, data collection, and analysis are rigorous and well-documented.
  • Clarity: Evaluate the clarity of the writing, organization of the manuscript, and logical flow of arguments.
  • Relevance: Consider the relevance and significance of the manuscript to the journal's focus on Buddhist thought and education.
  • Ethics: Ensure that the manuscript adheres to ethical standards, including the appropriate treatment of subjects and the disclosure of conflicts of interest.

5. Feedback Structure

  • Summary: Begin with a brief summary of the manuscript, outlining its key contributions and strengths.
  • Major Issues: Identify any significant weaknesses or areas for improvement, such as methodological flaws, unclear arguments, or unsupported conclusions.
  • Minor Issues: Note smaller issues like grammatical errors, unclear phrasing, or formatting inconsistencies.
  • Recommendation: Provide a clear recommendation: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject.

6. Constructive Feedback

  • Offer specific, actionable suggestions for improvement. Aim to be constructive and supportive, helping the authors strengthen their work.
  • Avoid overly critical or dismissive comments. Focus on how the manuscript can be improved.

7. Anonymity

  • Maintain anonymity throughout the review process. Do not include any information that could reveal your identity.

8. Ethical Vigilance

  • Be alert to any potential ethical issues, such as plagiarism, data manipulation, or undisclosed conflicts of interest. Report any concerns to the editor.

9. Review Process

  • Your review will be used by the editorial team to make a decision on the manuscript. You may be asked to review a revised version if major revisions are required.