Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected for relevant expertise, independence, and the ability to provide a reasoned assessment. The handling editor coordinates the selection under the journal’s editorial authority arrangements.

1. Expertise and Suitability
Reviewers should have relevant subject knowledge and experience with the manuscript’s methods, materials, or scholarly approach. Their expertise should be verifiable through publications, institutional information, or other credible records. They should be able to provide a constructive assessment within the agreed period and be open about the limits of their expertise.

Selection does not depend solely on academic rank, institutional prestige, or citation metrics. Taken together, the reviewers should cover the manuscript’s main assessment needs.

2. Independence and Conflict Checks
Required external reviewers must be independent of the author group and must not be members of the Al-Muhafidz editorial team. Membership in the Editorial Board alone does not qualify a person as one of the two required external reviewers.

Potential reviewers must disclose any relevant relationship, including shared institutional appointments, recent or ongoing collaboration, supervisory relationships, close personal ties, and financial or competing interests that could affect their assessment.

The handling editor evaluates these disclosures under the [Conflict of Interest] policy and replaces any reviewer whose independence cannot reasonably be maintained. A conflict discovered after a reviewer has accepted an invitation must be reported promptly.

3. Identity Verification and Author Suggestions
The editorial office verifies each reviewer’s identity and contact details, using independent sources where available. A non-institutional email address is not automatically disqualifying, but it may require additional checks.

Authors may suggest reviewers or request, with reasons, that particular individuals be excluded. Such suggestions are optional and do not bind the editor. Suggested reviewers go through the same verification and independence checks as all other candidates.

Authors must not contact prospective reviewers about an active assessment or arrange reviews themselves. Impersonation and manipulated reviewer suggestions are handled under the journal’s integrity procedures.

4. Invitation and Replacement
Reviewers should accept an invitation only if they are qualified, sufficiently independent, and available. Invitations state the response and report deadlines, and any extension must be agreed with the handling editor.

Additional or replacement reviewers may be invited when expertise is missing, reports are insufficient, a conflict arises, or a reviewer becomes unavailable. Reviewers are never chosen simply to obtain a preferred outcome.