Reviewer Guidelines

Peer review is the foundation of scholarly publishing. BJEAS is grateful to the researchers who give their time to this work and asks reviewers to observe the following.

Before accepting an invitation

• Confirm that the subject matter falls within your area of expertise.
• Confirm that you can complete the review within 21 days.
• Declare any conflict of interest. Decline if you have collaborated or co-published with any author in the last three years, work at the same institution, have a financial interest in the outcome, or have any personal relationship that could affect your objectivity.
• If you cannot review, please suggest an alternative reviewer where possible.

Conducting the review

Assess the manuscript against the following criteria and provide specific, constructive, evidence-based comments for each:

• Originality and significance. Does the work present new knowledge, methods, or applications? Does it advance the field?
• Relevance to scope. Is the subject appropriate for a journal of applied engineering and applied science?
• Title and abstract. Do they accurately and completely represent the content?
• Is the problem clearly stated, the literature adequately reviewed, and the research gap and objective explicit?
• Are the design, materials, instruments, procedures, and analyses described in sufficient detail for replication? Are the methods appropriate to the objective? Are sample size and statistical treatment justified?
• Are the data presented clearly and objectively? Are figures and tables necessary, correctly constructed, and self-explanatory? Are uncertainties and errors reported?
• Are the interpretations supported by the data? Is the work properly situated in the literature? Are limitations acknowledged?
• Does it follow from the results and address the stated objective without overreaching?
• Are they current, relevant, sufficient, and correctly formatted? Are important works missing? Is there excessive self-citation?
• Language and presentation. Is the text clear enough for an international readership? Note that language quality alone is not grounds for rejection if the science is sound; recommend language editing instead.
• Are ethical approvals, consent, conflict of interest, data availability, and AI use properly declared? Do you have any concern about plagiarism, duplicate publication, image manipulation, or data integrity? Raise such concerns with the editor confidentially rather than in the comments to the author.

Writing the report

Structure your report in three parts: (1) a brief summary of the manuscript in your own words, confirming that you have understood it; (2) major comments, numbered, addressing substantive scientific issues; (3) minor comments, numbered, addressing specific lines, figures, and typographical matters. Refer to page and line numbers. Be critical of the work, never of the person. Confidential comments to the editor may be entered in the separate field provided.

Recommendation

Recommendation	Meaning
Accept Submission	Publishable as it stands; no or purely typographical changes needed.
Revisions Required	Minor revision. The science is sound; clarifications, additional explanation, or presentational improvements are needed. Re-review usually not necessary.
Resubmit for Review	Major revision. Substantial additional analysis, experiments, or restructuring is required. The revised manuscript should be re-reviewed.
Resubmit Elsewhere	Sound work, but outside the scope of BJEAS.
Decline Submission	Fundamental flaws in design, execution, or novelty that revision cannot remedy.
See Comments	Use only where none of the above applies; explain fully in the confidential comments.

Confidentiality and recognition

The manuscript is a confidential document. Do not share it, cite it, use its content, or upload it to any external system including generative AI tools. Destroy or delete your copy after the review is complete.

BJEAS recognises reviewers through an annual list of reviewers published in the December issue (with the reviewer's consent), a certificate of appreciation issued on request, and, where the reviewer wishes, verified review records on their ORCID profile.