CIRD Reviewers Guild

Kindly find time to read through the reviewer guild before engaging in a manuscript review for CIRD. You could download the reviewer guide here

In reviewing manuscripts, please be polite as authors might be disappointed (at best) to receive a rejection letter. At the least, we must be gracious with our comments and offer succinct and constructive advice and criticism.  When possible, embed a compliment or favorable comment. When you criticize, consider how you would feel reading the criticism as an author.

Many authors are writing in a second or even third language. The writing must be excellent when the paper is in final form, but we can review papers, If you have time, offer suggestions for improved writing in your comments to the authors.  If you do not have time, simply make a polite comment that writing assistance will be needed.  Importantly, if you are going to criticize the writing, please do your best to write clearly and correctly. 


You will receive an invitation to review a manuscript via email. The invitation will come from “CIRD Editorial Office” with the subject as “Invitation to review manuscript XXXXX for journal XXXX” with the XXXXX being the assigned manuscript number. The email will contain the title, abstract, and links to accept or decline the invitation to review.  

If you are unable to complete the review in a timely manner, please decline the invitation so we can invite another reviewer. If you do not respond to the email within 4 days, you will be automatically uninvited so we can expedite the review process. If you have questions about the review process, please contact the Editorial Office by email at or


If you agree to review, a “thank you” email is sent, providing access to the full submission PDF. This email advises you of the due date (generally 14 days from your date of acceptance).


In reviewing manuscript for CIRD, the reviewer form provided to reviewers have five section which included, Acceptance/Rejection, Major Revision, Minor Revision, Optional Review and general rating of manuscript.


As per our policy, the following are what reviewers should look out for in the review process

  1. Soundness of the study introduction/background
  2. Citation: Currency of citation
  3. Adequacy of citation
  4. Adherence to referencing style (APA-6th edition) See APA 6th edition here
  5. Plagiarism of part or whole of the manuscript
  6. Methodology of the research
  7. Findings and study recommendation


  • If you make comment in the Major Revision section, you will be invited to re-review the revised submission.
  • If you suggest a minor/optional revision, please indicate in the Comments to Editor if you would like to see the revised article
  • If you select acceptance, you will be require to rate the manuscript on a scale of 1-10. Based on this rating the editors will decide either to accept or reject such manuscript.
  • If you select rejection, you will be required to provide reason for possible rejection of such manuscript. As per CIRD policy, no manuscript should be rejected based on novelty but on technical ground.
  • If a manuscript will require more than 65% re-write or if the methodology is critically flawed, please reject or make recommendation to aid the author.
  • If a paper is clearly flawed beyond redemption, feel free to be brief, offer a few constructive comments and criticisms, and submit a recommendation for rejection. We would prefer that you devote your valuable time and expertise to better papers that are worth of revision and possible acceptance.


When you are ready to submit your review, send it Once you send the reviewed manuscript to, you will receive an acknowledgment of receipt and note of thanks from the editorial office along with certificate of review

Meaningful peer review is time-consuming. We are grateful for your efforts and advice.  Thoughtful reviews improve papers, which in turn provide better information to readers, ultimately improving scientific research and outcomes. Thank you.