RESET: Review of Education, Science, and Technology highly values the contribution of reviewers in maintaining the academic quality, scientific integrity, and publication standards of the journal. Reviewers play a vital role in evaluating submitted manuscripts through a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that every published article meets internationally recognized scholarly and ethical standards.

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Evaluate the originality, academic quality, scientific contribution, and relevance of assigned manuscripts.
• Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments to improve manuscript quality.
• Assess whether the manuscript aligns with the journal's aims, focus, and scope.
• Review the clarity of research objectives, methodology, findings, discussion, and conclusions.
• Maintain confidentiality and refrain from using unpublished information for personal or third-party benefit.

Review Criteria

During the review process, reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects:

• Originality: Novelty and innovation of the research ideas, concepts, or findings.
• Relevance: Suitability of the manuscript to the journal's aims and scope.
• Methodology: Appropriateness of research design, methods, and analytical techniques.
• Scientific Contribution: Significance of the study in advancing knowledge within education, science, and technology.
• References: Adequacy, relevance, and currency of cited literature.
• Writing Quality: Organization, clarity, academic language, and logical presentation.

Review Feedback

Reviewers are expected to provide professional and constructive comments in two categories:

1. Comments for the Author: Suggestions and recommendations to improve the manuscript.
2. Comments for the Editor: Confidential evaluation including publication recommendations such as Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.

Review Timeline

Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluation within 10–14 days after accepting the review invitation. If reviewers are unable to complete the review within the specified period or identify any potential conflict of interest, they should promptly inform the editorial office.

Reviewer Ethics

• Maintain the confidentiality of all information related to the manuscript.
• Avoid conflicts of interest that could influence the objectivity of the review.
• Conduct reviews fairly, professionally, and without discrimination.
• Provide respectful, scholarly, and constructive feedback.
• Report any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, research misconduct, or ethical concerns to the editor.