Bounty of Excellence

In traditional systems, the referees must express their views in writing, in a form or in detail about the articles. To play this role, Sinaub's publications management system has provided dynamic judges with judges and evaluators.
To start the trial, login to the personal page after entering the username and password. From the menu on the left of this page, enter the referee's special page.

There are three options on this page:
New articles submitted for arbitration and you have not yet opened.
Articles that are unfinished in previous appeals, and you can re-open and complete the arbitration process.
Refereed articles, which are just listed, and since you have announced your final comment, you no longer need more work and you can not change the previous comment!

Suppose that a new article has been sent to you. These articles are listed at the top of the page, and next to each item, a proprietary code is inserted. Click this code to open the article specification. By clicking on the article code, you can see the editor's description, article abstract, and the special box for posting your first review.
In the first stage, only you are asked to declare your readiness for arbitration; you can accept or not accept the option. Only after the acceptance is the judgment that you can view the full text of the article and insert its opinion about it in the system. In the management system of Sinawb, the referee can:

Write a special note to the author.
Write a special note to the editor.
Open the dedicated evaluation form and fill it out.
Send an edited file or notes and annotations through the system to the editor. Most evaluators prefer to comment on the margin of the article.

Respected Reviewers are requested to register on Publones website at the address https://publons.com/about/home/, Emails Received from the Journal after evaluating the article to the address reviews@publons.com to send their names to be registered as international referees.

Reviewers

Review a manuscript is a privilege. However, it is a time-consuming responsibility. Hence, TEJ’s Journal Editorial Board, authors, and audiences appreciate your willingness to accept this responsibility. In so doing, TEJ needs reviewers who can provide helpful comments on submitted manuscripts within the determined period of time by the editor. Maintaining TEJ as a scientific journal of high quality depends on reviewers with a high level of expertise and an ability to be objective, fair, and insightful in their evaluation of manuscripts.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

If TEJ’s Editor-in-Chief has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following:

1. Review manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors
2. Review multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary
3. Providing all required information within the requested deadlines
4. Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the manuscript they are asked to review
5. Reporting possible research misconducts
6. Treating the manuscript as a confidential document
7. Not communicating directly with authors (If they know the author/s)
8. Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer
9. Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work
10. Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under review in any other journal
11. Writing comments in Original or English language.

What Should Be Checked?

1. Novelty
2. Originality
3. Scientific reliability
4. Valuable contribution to the science
5. Adding new aspects to the existed field of study
6. Ethical aspects
7. Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines
8. References provided to substantiate the content
9. Grammar, punctuation and spelling
10. Scientific misconduct