Reviewer Guideline

Malumat adopts a double-blind peer review system to ensure the quality of scientific publications. In this context, the contribution of reviewers is not only considered a technical part of the evaluation process but also one of the fundamental pillars of scientific publishing.
The fundamental responsibilities expected from reviewers are as follows:
• Neutrality and Confidentiality: The peer review process is completely confidential. The evaluated texts and information about the author(s) should not be shared with any third parties in any way. Reviewers should act solely based on scientific criteria, not personal biases, during the evaluation process.
• Timely Feedback: Evaluations should be completed within the specified timeframe and uploaded to the journal system. In necessary cases, the reviewer may request an extension or should inform early if they are unable to complete the evaluation.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviewer reports should clearly outline the strengths and weaknesses of the work; they should use a scientific, constructive, and respectful tone that allows the author(s) to improve their work. In negative evaluations, the justifications should be clearly stated.
• Ethical Sensitivity: Reviewers should inform the editorial board when they detect potential ethical issues (plagiarism, data fabrication, lack of citation, duplicate publication, etc.). Additionally, they should refrain from evaluating works that present a conflict of interest.
Although the peer review process is based on volunteerism, Malumat views this contribution as a valuable service to the academic community and appreciates it with gratitude. Our journal monitors the review activity of the referees; it continuously updates the referee database based on criteria such as review quality, timely submission, and academic content contribution.
We thank all the reviewers who contribute to our journal for their efforts in the scientific processes.