Reviewer Resources
JBSR provides practical tools to help reviewers deliver high quality, consistent reviews.
Use these resources to evaluate manuscripts efficiently and ethically.
Resource Toolkit
Review Checklist
Core criteria for assessing scope, methods, and evidence.
Ethics Guidance
Conflict of interest and confidentiality standards for reviewers.
Decision Framework
Suggested structure for major and minor revision recommendations.
Best Practice Reminders
Focus on the manuscript's contribution to biosemiotics, not on author identity or institutional affiliation. Provide specific, actionable feedback with examples. Use neutral language and avoid dismissive comments that do not help the authors improve.
Balanced Reviews
Combine critique with recognition of strengths to help authors understand both impact and areas for improvement.
Structuring Your Report
Start with a brief summary of the manuscript in your own words to show you understood the work. Then list major issues that affect validity or clarity, followed by minor corrections or suggestions. Clear structure helps editors make decisions and helps authors prioritize revisions.
Data And Methods Checks
Verify that methods are described in enough detail to support replication and that conclusions are supported by the presented evidence. Note any missing controls, unclear sampling, or unreported limitations. If data availability statements are incomplete, request clarification.
Reviewing Interdisciplinary Work
Biosemiotics spans biology, philosophy, communication, and cognitive science. When reviewing interdisciplinary submissions, evaluate whether the authors clearly explain concepts and justify methodological choices for a broad audience.
Confidential Comments
Use confidential comments to flag ethical concerns, conflicts, or sensitive issues that should not be shared with authors. Provide clear evidence when possible so editors can act appropriately. Avoid sharing speculative claims without support.
When To Raise Concerns
If you suspect plagiarism, data manipulation, or ethical issues, notify the editor through confidential comments. Provide evidence or citations where possible. The editorial office will handle investigations.
Recommendation Guidance
Use the decision framework to align recommendations with the level of revision required. Major revision should reflect substantive changes to methods, analysis, or interpretation. Minor revision should focus on clarity, formatting, or small corrections.
Timelines And Availability
If you cannot complete a review on time, inform the editorial office promptly so an alternate reviewer can be invited. You may also request extensions when needed. Timely reviews improve author experience and publication speed.
Let us know your preferred review window when accepting invitations.
Need A Resource Pack?
Email the editorial office to request templates or updated guidance.
