Indian Journal of NanoScience

Information For Librarians

The quality of Journals of Indian Society for Education and Environment(ISEE) lies in the hand of reviewers. Peer review is a critical factor in establishing high quality scientific research. The editorial Board of Journals of Indian Society for Education and Environment(ISEE) seeks relentless and unreserved support from the reviewers. Journals of Indian Society for Education and Environment(ISEE) submits the following hints for the noble task.

The objective of the review:

The reviewer of Journals of Indian Society for Education and Environment(ISEE) will look for technical rigor and the novelty of the work presented. The key features of a review will include:
  • Look for conceptual advancement over previously published work
  • Any omission of the previously published findings on the same or similar problem
  • Eliminating any redundancy
  • Establishing readability and clarity in presentation
  • Right approach of interpretation of the result
  • Any alternate hypothesis or understanding over the results obtained
  • Statistical accuracy and validity of the methods adopted in studying the problem (if necessary the reviewers can obtain the primary data from the authors through the Editor)
  • Look for suspicious data and unethical way of presentation (duplication, manipulation of data, plagiarism etc)
  • A specific suggestion to improve the understanding of the theme or work
  • Summarizing the strength and weakness of the paper
  • Potential importance of the work in the context of present and future
  • The efforts of reviewers will be of paramount importance for the journal to curb any unacceptable way of publication including plagerism.

Direct correction:

In case of direct correction on the word file, the reviewers can use different font colours (blue) to mark their corrections. For correcting pdf file, please consult the help link: http://www.Adobe Acrobat Tutorial.htm, if need be.

Specific suggestions:

If some aspects of the comment seem inappropriate for presentation to authors, the same can be separately indicated for the eyes of the Editor only. The general concern and comments can be made in such a manner that it can be addressed to the authors. In case of rejecting the article, the reviewers need to indicate the ground on which the decision is taken. Reviewers can be very critical on the article presented, and at the same time they must avoid any personalized remarks which may be viewed as biased or with ulterior motive.

Confidentiality:

It is needless to say that the reviewers must preserve the confidentiality of the unpublished works.