Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewer Guidelines

Introduction

Daryaft recognises the vital role of reviewers in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of scholarly publishing. Peer reviewers make an essential contribution to ensuring that published research meets high academic standards and advances knowledge in Urdu language, literature, linguistics, literary criticism, translation studies, and related disciplines.

The journal operates a double-blind peer review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. All identifying information is removed from manuscripts before they are sent for review to ensure fairness, impartiality, and independent evaluation.

Review Process

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their suitability for the journal's scope, originality, academic quality, and compliance with the submission guidelines.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are assigned to independent expert reviewers. Reviews are conducted through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform or, where necessary, through official correspondence managed by the Editorial Office.

Reviewers are requested to evaluate manuscripts using the journal's review form and provide constructive comments and recommendations supported by clear academic reasoning.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally.
  • Accept review assignments only when they possess appropriate subject expertise and can complete the review within the requested timeframe.
  • Provide constructive, respectful, and evidence-based comments that assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
  • Assess the originality, scholarly contribution, methodological soundness, and significance of the research.
  • Support recommendations with clear academic justification.
  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout and after the review process.
  • Inform the Editor promptly if they are unable to complete the review or if they identify a conflict of interest.
  • Report any suspected ethical concerns or research misconduct.
  • Refrain from contacting authors directly regarding the manuscript.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should assess manuscripts based on the journal's review form, including:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of Daryaft.
  • Originality and contribution to knowledge.
  • Scholarly significance and academic merit.
  • Clarity of objectives and research questions.
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology.
  • Quality of analysis and interpretation.
  • Logical organisation and coherence.
  • Adequacy and accuracy of references and citations.
  • Validity and consistency of conclusions.
  • Compliance with ethical standards.
  • Quality of language, style, and overall presentation.

Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.
  • Conduct reviews impartially and without personal bias.
  • Avoid discriminatory or inappropriate comments relating to nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, institutional affiliation, or personal beliefs.
  • Identify possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, redundant publication, citation manipulation, data fabrication, data falsification, image manipulation, peer review manipulation, or other forms of publication misconduct.
  • Avoid using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal research, teaching, publication, or professional advantage.

Review Recommendations

Following evaluation, reviewers should recommend one of the following:

  • Accept Submission
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Resubmit for Review after Major Revisions
  • Reject Submission

Reviewers should provide detailed comments for both the Editor and the author(s), clearly explaining the reasons for their recommendation and identifying any revisions that would improve the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

Although Daryaft follows a double-blind peer review process, reviewers who recognise the identity of an author or become aware of any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest must immediately inform the Editor and, where appropriate, decline the review invitation.

Conflicts of interest may include personal, professional, academic, institutional, collaborative, financial, or other relationships that could influence the reviewer's impartiality.

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents. Reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscripts with any third party without prior permission from the Editor.
  • Discuss manuscript content with unauthorised individuals.
  • Retain, distribute, reproduce, or use manuscript materials for any purpose outside the peer review process.
  • Disclose any information concerning the manuscript or the review process.

The obligation of confidentiality continues after completion of the review process.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

To protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewers must not upload, submit, or otherwise disclose any part of a manuscript to publicly available or third-party generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools or services that may retain, process, or reuse submitted content.

AI-assisted tools should not replace independent scholarly assessment, critical analysis, or professional judgement. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, and recommendations contained in their review reports.

Timeliness

Reviewers who accept an invitation are expected to submit their reports within the agreed review period. If circumstances prevent completion of the review on time, reviewers should promptly notify the Editorial Office so that alternative arrangements can be made.

Recognition of Reviewers

Daryaft sincerely appreciates the valuable contributions of its reviewers. Their expertise, professionalism, and commitment are fundamental to maintaining the journal's academic quality, publication standards, and research integrity.