Peer review as refereeing is a collaborative process that allows independent experts in the same field of research to evaluate and comment on manuscript submissions. The outcome of a peer review gives authors feedback to improve their work and, critically, allows the editor to assess the paper’s suitability for publication.
Should not have published together with the authors in the last three years
Hold a PhD degree
Have relevant experience and have a proven publication record in the field of the submitted paper (Scopus, ORCID)
Are experienced scholars in the field of the submitted paper
Hold an official and recognized academic affiliation.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept or decline any invitations as soon as possible and Suggest alternative reviewers if an invitation must be declined.
Request a deadline extension as soon as possible in case more time is required to provide a comprehensive report.
Peer reviewing is a form of collaboration between experts. Their critical feedback often improves research and helps propel it forward.
To ensure that the content or the author information present in the manuscript is legible.
To evaluate all manuscripts such that they fall within the scope of the journal.
Maintain the journals internal integrity by suggesting the corrections.
Working with the publisher to attract the best manuscripts and research that will be of interest to readers.
Ensure that all involved in the publication process understand that it is inappropriate to manipulate citations.
Declaration of Confidentiality
AnaPub journals operate double-blind peer review. Until the article is published, reviewers should keep the content of the manuscript, including the Abstract, confidential. Reviewers should also be careful not to reveal their identity to the authors, either in their comments or in metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.
How to register as a reviewer
To join our pool of peer reviewers you will need to create an account in our secure Ansis Manager Submission system. When activating your account online, you will be able to indicate your classifications or areas of expertise, so you are sent manuscripts to peer review that align with your interests.
Reviewer Use of Generative AI Tools
To maintain the integrity, confidentiality, and fairness of the peer-review process, the Journal of Robotics Spectrum (JRS) sets the following guidelines for the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools:
Confidentiality and Data Protection Reviewers must not input or share any part of a manuscript (including abstracts, figures, or data) into public or commercial AI tools. All submissions are strictly confidential and must be handled only through secure journal systems.
Permitted Uses Generative AI tools may be used only for improving language clarity or summarizing internal editorial notes, not for evaluating, rewriting, or making acceptance decisions about manuscripts.
Decision Responsibility All peer-review decisions must be based on human judgment and expertise. AI tools may assist the process but cannot replace reviewer evaluation.
Transparency and Accountability If any AI tool is used for minor editorial assistance, its use should be disclosed internally within the editorial communication notes and approved by the Editor-in-Chief.
Ethical Compliance Any misuse of AI that compromises author confidentiality, data security, or review impartiality will be treated as a serious ethical violation and handled according to JRS and COPE guidelines.
