Introduction

Thanks for accepting to review articles for Lumina Literati Publishing (LLP). Your expertise and constructive feedback are crucial in upholding the quality and integrity of the research we publish. The guidelines below will assist you in providing a comprehensive and unbiased review. Please read these instructions carefully before you begin your review.

Confidentiality

Privileged Information: You are given access to information that is sensitive. Treat the manuscript and all ancillary documents as confidential materials. Do not use or share it with others nor should you make any reference of the manuscript while doing your own study on this topic. If there is need for consultations or another expert’s opinion, please obtain permission from the editor.

Conflict of Interest

Personal relationships, financial interests and professional attachments to any of authors constitute conflicts of interest should be considered by you prior to agreeing on reviewing an article. You can have a conflict if you are connected personally or professionally to one of its authors or when it comes to writing about research topic that has competing interests associated with it. Should there be any doubt as whether such conflicts exist, please inform us through our editor.

Review Process Overview

• Double-Blind Review: LLP follows a double-blind review process; hence both reviewers and authors do not know each other’s identity which promotes fair judgement.
• Timeline: We expect the whole review process to last between four to six weeks only; therefore, as soon as possible notify the editor if such period cannot work out with your schedule.
• Review Criteria: Your review should address the following aspects of the manuscript:

Originality and Novelty

Relevance and Significance

• Methodology
• Results and Interpretation
• Presentation & Structure
• References & Citations

1. Detailed Review Criteria Originality and Novelty Importance: Assess if the research offers new insights or advances in knowledge within this field
2. Innovation: Assess the novelty of approaches and techniques used in new. Does manuscript introduce new methods or applications?
3. Relevance and Significance Scope: Is it within Lumina Literati Publishing (LLP) subject matter? Evaluate its significance to the field and influence on future research.

Introduction

Contribution: Determine if the findings have a significant contribution to the already known. Are the implications of the research well stated and important?

Methodology

Soundness: Is the research design and methods appropriate and rigorous? Do they describe their methodology properly? Have they been used for answering questions?

Reproducibility: Can other researchers replicate this study? How clear are materials and procedures?

Results and Interpretation

• Clarity: Were the results clear, accurate ad concise enough? Was it logical in presentation of findings?
• Analysis: Did data analysis handle many issues related to appropriateness as well as thoroughness? Does statistical test helpfully use its results?
• Conclusions: Are there any conclusions presented by data? Are these interpretations reasonable or not?

Presentation and Structure

• Writing Quality: Look at whether writing is clear, coherent, and concise. Is the manuscript well organized and easy to follow?
• Figures and Tables: How good is quality of figures & tables? Did they provide a useful summary of key findings?
• Formatting: LLP’s formatting guidelines should be adhered to. Are references, headings, citations formatted correctly in text.

References and Citations

• Relevance check: relevancy of all references—are they relevant enough/updated ones that fit into our content very well.
• Completeness; Have all important previous works been cited? Any critical studies that authors left out?

Providing Feedback

1. Specifying areas for improvement using positive recommendations rather than personal comments,
2. Again, one must balance pointing out weaknesses with acknowledging strengths.
3. Clearing stating your response or comments when giving them so that you avoid making ambiguous remarks.
4. Specificity is crucial when making certain comments on parts of texts being commented upon. Since this may be vague one should refer line numbers or page sections .

Reviewer Recommendations

As a reviewer you are asked to make one of the following recommendations:

1. Accept: The paper is ready for publication in current form or with minor changes.
2. Minor Revisions: these are just a few adjustments. These should be fixable without any large-scale modifications.
3. Major Revisions: this manuscript needs substantial alterations and cannot be reconsidered until it is revised significantly.
4. Reject: This manuscript is unsuitable in its present form; also, it seems unlikely that further revisions will transform it to being suitable for publication.

Ethical Considerations

1. Plagiarism: Be watchful for signs of plagiarism. If you notice any areas which have been copied without references consult the editor for help.
2. Data Fabrication/Falsification: Concerns raised regarding data an finding authenticity
3. Ethical Approval: Check if research on human or animal participants has been granted approval by ethics committee. Go through the manuscript to find such statements related to informed consent and ethical approval.

Submitting Your Review

1. Online System; You can submit your review via LLP online submission system. Ensure that all mandatory fields are filled out properly.
2. Comments to the Editor—You may notify the editor of any additional concerns or suggestions on “Confidential Comments to the Editor” section but do not make them known to authors.
3. Comments to the Authors—In “comments to the authors”, please provide detailed constructive comments, ensuring clarity and actionability of your feedback.

Post-Review Process

• Revision: If the author returns the manuscript for revision, you may be requested to comment on changes in subsequent versions. Please indicate your readiness to do so during submission of your initial review.
• Communication: The editorial office may get in touch with you for elucidations or additional information about this review. Kindly respond promptly to such requests.

Reviewer Recognition

• Acknowledgment: LLP appreciates reviewers who contribute invaluable input to published manuscripts. If you prefer not to disclose your identity please notify us.
• Reviewer Certificate: At your request, LLP will give a certificate confirming that you have reviewed one of our publications.
• Publons: LLP encourages reviewers to register their reviews with Publons so they can gain recognition for their work undertaken. Remember, only the act itself is announced, but no content or results will ever be revealed.

Continuous Improvement

• Feedback: Feedback is crucial for improving the peer-review process at LLP. If there are any ideas on how this process could be made better, kindly share them with the journal’s secretary.
• Training and Development: In relation to reviewing papers for publication, Lumina Literati Publishing provides a host of training activities and resources as possible ways forward with respect to improvement of reviewing skills within it. We advise all reviewers to participate in such programs since they can bolster their reviewing abilities further.

Conclusion

This represents an important aspect of scholarly publishing; therefore as Manuscript Reviewers we owe it both ourselves and authors whose works we handle through our hardworking professionalism that ensures only quality research gets published by Lumina Literati Publishing. Your dedication and contribution towards knowledge advancement in your field is highly appreciated.

These step-by-step guidelines will ensure effective participation in the peer review process at Lumina Literati Publishing resulting into publication of high-quality and impactful research only.Without much ado, thank you very much for your commitment and hard work.