Overview
Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the academic quality, integrity, and credibility of Insieme Arti – Journal for Performing Arts.
Reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, objective, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
1. Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.
Reviewers must not:
- Share manuscripts with others
- Discuss the manuscript outside the review process
- Use unpublished information for personal advantage
Maintaining confidentiality is essential to the integrity of the peer review process and the trust placed in reviewers.
2. Objectivity
Reviews should be objective, impartial, and supported by clear academic reasoning.
Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.
Reviewers should focus their comments on the scholarly content, methodology, and contribution of the work, not on personal attributes or unrelated matters.
3. Constructive Feedback
Reviewers should provide comments that help authors improve the quality, clarity, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.
Suggestions should be respectful and evidence-based.
Rather than simply pointing out weaknesses, reviewers should offer guidance on how the manuscript can be strengthened and improved.
4. Academic Quality Assessment
Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on:
- Originality
- Relevance
- Methodology
- Literature review
- Clarity of presentation
- Significance of findings
- Contribution to the field of performing arts
5. Ethical Concerns
Reviewers should notify the Editor if they identify:
- Plagiarism
- Duplicate publication
- Unethical research practices
- Fabricated or manipulated data
- Copyright concerns
Early identification of ethical issues helps maintain the integrity of the scholarly record and protects all parties involved.
6. Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should decline invitations to review manuscripts if they have any conflict of interest arising from:
- Personal relationships
- Professional collaborations
- Institutional affiliations
- Financial interests
If unsure whether a conflict exists, reviewers should contact the Editorial Office for guidance. Disclosure of conflicts of interest is essential to maintaining the credibility of peer review.
7. Timeliness
Reviewers should complete reviews within the requested timeframe.
If unable to complete the review promptly, reviewers should inform the Editorial Office immediately.
Timely reviews ensure that the publication process moves forward efficiently and authors receive feedback without unnecessary delays.
8. Recommendation
Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:
Review Recommendations
- Accept – The manuscript is ready for publication
- Minor Revision – Small changes needed; likely to be accepted after revision
- Major Revision – Significant changes needed; requires re-review after substantial revision
- Reject – The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards
The final publication decision rests solely with the Editor.
9. Professional Conduct
Reviewers should maintain professionalism, respect diversity of opinion, and evaluate manuscripts solely on scholarly merit without discrimination based on:
- Nationality
- Gender
- Race
- Religion
- Institutional affiliation
- Political beliefs
Peer review is a collaborative process that strengthens scholarly research. Professional conduct and constructive engagement benefit the entire academic community.