Reviewer Guidelines

Thank you for agreeing to serve as a reviewer for EIU Press.

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality, integrity, credibility, and scholarly value of publications issued by EIU Press. The purpose of the review process is to provide constructive, objective, and professional feedback that assists both the author and the Press in producing high-quality publications.

Reviewers may be asked to evaluate:

• Academic books
• Scholarly monographs
• Doctoral dissertation monographs
• Conference proceedings
• Textbooks
• Professional handbooks
• Edited volumes
• Educational resources

Reviews should focus on scholarly merit, quality, relevance, and suitability for publication.

Reviewers are expected to:

• Conduct reviews objectively and professionally.
• Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
• Evaluate submissions fairly and without bias.
• Provide constructive feedback.
• Identify strengths and weaknesses.
• Declare any conflicts of interest.
• Submit reviews within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers should evaluate the work itself rather than the author.

All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.

Reviewers shall not:

• Share manuscripts with others without permission.
• Distribute manuscript content.
• Use unpublished information for personal advantage.
• Discuss submissions publicly.

All materials should be treated as privileged information.

Reviewers must disclose any real or perceived conflicts of interest.

Examples include:

• Personal relationships with the author.
• Professional collaborations with the author.
• Financial interests related to the work.
• Competitive relationships.
• Institutional conflicts.

Where a significant conflict exists, reviewers should decline the review invitation.

Reviewers should consider the following:

• Does the work contribute new knowledge, ideas, or perspectives?
• Does it provide meaningful scholarly or professional value?

• Is the content academically rigorous?
• Are arguments supported appropriately?
• Are references adequate and current?

• Is the manuscript well organized?
• Is the content logically presented?
• Are chapters and sections coherent?

• Is the writing clear and understandable?
• Are concepts explained effectively?
• Is the intended audience appropriately addressed?

• Are claims supported by evidence?
• Are references accurate?
• Are figures and tables used appropriately?

• Is the topic relevant to the intended audience?
• Does the work align with the mission of EIU Press?

Reviewer comments should be:

• Specific
• Professional
• Respectful
• Actionable

Comments should focus on improving the manuscript rather than criticizing the author.

Examples of useful feedback include:

• Suggestions for clarification
• Recommendations for additional references
• Identification of inconsistencies
• Suggestions for improving organization
• Identification of unsupported claims

Reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief if they identify potential concerns, including:

• Plagiarism
• Data fabrication
• Data falsification
• Duplicate publication
• Copyright infringement
• Ethical issues involving research participants
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Reviewers are not expected to conduct formal investigations but should report concerns when identified.

Reviewers should evaluate the quality and integrity of the manuscript regardless of whether AI tools may have been used.

If reviewers suspect:

• Fabricated references
• AI-generated inaccuracies
• Unsupported content
• Other integrity concerns

they should notify the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewers should not upload confidential manuscripts to public AI systems without explicit authorization from EIU Press.

At the conclusion of the review, reviewers should recommend one of the following:

Final publication decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewers are generally requested to complete reviews within:

• 2–4 weeks for books and monographs
• 1–3 weeks for conference proceedings
• As otherwise agreed with the Editor-in-Chief

If additional time is required, reviewers should notify the Editor-in-Chief as soon as possible.

All communication regarding reviews should be directed to:

EIU Press

European International University (EIU–Paris)

EIU Press values the contribution of reviewers and may acknowledge reviewer service through:

• Certificates of Review Service
• Annual reviewer acknowledgments
• Letters of appreciation
• Recognition on the EIU Press website, where appropriate

By accepting a review assignment, reviewers agree to uphold the principles of fairness, confidentiality, academic integrity, and professionalism that underpin the mission of EIU Press.

The thoughtful contribution of reviewers is essential to maintaining the quality and credibility of scholarly publishing.