Reviewer Guidelines

The Horizon Journal (THJ)
For Peer Reviewers

Contents

Role of reviewers
Reviewer responsibilities
Review criteria
Review format
Confidentiality and ethics
Reviewer eligibility
Communication and feedback
Timeline
Recognition

1. Role of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality, integrity, and credibility of THJ. Their evaluations guide editorial decisions and help authors improve their work. THJ relies on reviewers’ expertise, fairness, and professionalism to uphold its scholarly standards.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback
Evaluate the manuscript’s originality, clarity, methodology, and relevance
Identify ethical concerns, plagiarism, or data inconsistencies
Maintain confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest
Suggest improvements without rewriting the manuscript

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on the following dimensions:

Dimension	Description
Originality	Is the work novel and non-redundant?
Relevance	Does it fit the journal’s scope and audience?
Methodology	Is the research design sound and replicable?
Clarity	Is the writing clear, structured, and well-supported?
Contribution	Does it advance theory, practice, or policy?
References	Are sources current, relevant, and properly cited?
Ethics	Are ethical standards met and transparently disclosed?

4. Review Format

THJ uses a structured review format consisting of:

Quantitative scores: 1–5 scale for each criterion
Qualitative comments: For authors and editors
Final recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, Reject

Reviewers will complete this via the official Review Form assigned in OJS.

5. Confidentiality and Ethics

Reviewers must:

Not share or discuss the manuscript with others
Declare any potential conflicts of interest
Decline the review if unable to be objective or timely
Respect author anonymity and editorial confidentiality

6. Reviewer Eligibility

Reviewers should have:

Relevant academic or professional expertise
Experience in publishing or reviewing scholarly work
No direct affiliation with the authors

7. Communication and Feedback

Reviewers are encouraged to:

Use respectful and professional language
Focus on content, not personal critique
Provide actionable suggestions to improve the manuscript

8. Timeline

Reviews are expected within 14 days of assignment. Extensions may be granted upon request. Prompt communication with the editorial team is appreciated.