Please observe carefully the following guidelines on the role of the referee.

1. Expertise: Papers are not always sent to a referee whose field is identical to the subject matter of that paper. You don't have to be precisely qualified in a field to be a constructive referee. If, however, a paper is so distant from your field that you do not feel qualified to judge its merits, please return it to the editor, who will locate another referee.

2. Confidentiality: Referees receive unpublished work, which must be treated as confidential until published. They should destroy all electronic and printed copies of the draft paper and referee report once they have received confirmation that their reports have been received by the editor.

3. Conflict of Interest: Referees must declare any conflict of interest or any other factor which may affect their independence--in cases for instance, where they have received a paper of a colleague or an intellectual opponent. In cases of conflict of interest, please notify the editor of your inability to referee a particular paper.

4. Intellectual Merit: A paper must be judged on its intellectual merits alone. Personal criticism or criticism based solely on the political or social views of the referee is not acceptable.

5. Full Explanation: Critical or negative judgments must be fully supported by detailed reference to evidence from the paper under review or other relevant sources.

6. Plagiarism and Copyright: If a referee considers that a paper may contain plagiarism or that it might breach another party's copyright, they should notify the editor for the journal, providing the relevant citations to support their claim.

7. Responsiveness: Referees are asked to return their reports within ONE WEEK. This assists us to provide rapid feedback to the author.
 
To review papers, the process is as follows:

Read the paper and organize your review so that an introductory paragraph gives your overall impression of the manuscript and highlights the major shortcomings. This paragraph should be followed by specific, numbered comments, which, if appropriate, may be subdivided into major and minor points. Criticism should be presented dispassionately; offensive remarks are not acceptable. Papers are assessed by referees against following criteria


• Significance
• Relevance
• Clarity of Thematic Focus
• Relationship to Literature
• Research Design and Data
• Data Analysis and Use of Data
• Use of Theory
• Critical Qualities
• Clarity of Conclusions
• Quality of Communication
• Adherence to APA Style and appropriateness of the references.


Make annotations to the paper if you wish, using some method for clearly differentiating your text from the author's, such as block letters, different colored text in Microsoft Word.

Finally advise the editor of your recommendation for acceptance, modification, or rejection of the research paper and submit the detailed review at editor.mechanica@confabjournals.com.

The final decision regarding modification, acceptance, or rejection of a manuscript rests solely with the editor.

It is recommended that you make a copy of the review for your files. The manuscript may be returned to you for a second review, particularly if the requested modification was extensive. In this case, you will need to evaluate the author's responses to your original criticisms.