| Post date: 2026/07/15 |
Welcome
The Editorial Board of the Journal of Sport Biomechanics sincerely appreciates the valuable contribution of reviewers. Peer reviewers play a fundamental role in maintaining the scientific quality, integrity, and credibility of the journal by providing objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
These guidelines are intended to assist reviewers throughout the review process and to promote high standards of scientific peer review.
1. Reviewer Qualifications
Reviewers are selected based on their scientific expertise and research experience in sport biomechanics and related disciplines.
Preference is given to reviewers who:
• Hold a PhD or an equivalent academic qualification in a relevant field;
• Have an active publication record in recognized scientific journals;
• Possess expertise relevant to the submitted manuscript;
• Are able to provide objective, fair, and independent evaluations.
2. Before Accepting a Review Invitation
Before accepting an invitation to review, reviewers should ensure that:
• The manuscript falls within their area of expertise;
• They are able to complete the review within the requested review period;
• They have no financial, institutional, academic, or personal conflict of interest;
• They can maintain complete confidentiality throughout the review process.
If reviewers are unable to accept the invitation, they are encouraged to decline promptly so that another qualified reviewer can be invited without unnecessary delay.
3. During the Review
Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive comments that contribute to improving the scientific quality of the manuscript.
Comments should be:
• Objective and evidence-based;
• Respectful and professional;
• Clear and constructive;
• Focused on scientific merit rather than personal opinions.
Suggestions intended to improve the quality, clarity, and methodological rigor of the manuscript are highly appreciated.
4. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects when evaluating a manuscript:
• Originality and novelty of the study;
• Scientific significance and contribution to the field;
• Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
• Study design and methodology;
• Statistical analysis and interpretation of results;
• Ethical compliance;
• Clarity and organization of the manuscript;
• Quality of figures and tables;
• Adequacy and relevance of references;
• Validity of the conclusions.
5. Reviewer Recommendations
Following evaluation, reviewers are requested to recommend one of the following editorial decisions:
• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject
Reviewer recommendations are advisory in nature. The final editorial decision is made solely by the Editor-in-Chief after careful consideration of the reviewers' comments together with the journal's editorial policies, scientific standards, and ethical requirements.
6. Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.
Reviewers must not:
• Share manuscripts with others without permission from the Editorial Office;
• Discuss unpublished work with third parties;
• Use unpublished information for personal, academic, or financial benefit;
• Contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript.
Confidentiality should be maintained before, during, and after completion of the review.
7. Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should decline review invitations whenever any actual or potential conflict of interest could influence—or reasonably be perceived to influence—their judgment.
Examples include:
• Recent collaboration with the authors;
• Employment at the same institution;
• Financial relationships;
• Personal relationships;
• Academic competition.
Further guidance is available in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.
8. Ethical Responsibilities
If reviewers identify possible ethical concerns during the review process, they should promptly notify the Editorial Office.
Such concerns may include:
• Plagiarism;
• Duplicate or redundant publication;
• Data fabrication or falsification;
• Image manipulation;
• Unethical research involving human participants or animals;
• Inappropriate authorship;
• Citation manipulation.
Reviewers should report concerns confidentially through the journal's editorial system and should not contact the authors directly.
9. Timeliness
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics highly values reviewers who provide thorough, constructive, and timely evaluations.
Reviewers are kindly requested to complete their reviews within the requested review period. If additional time is required, they are encouraged to inform the Editorial Office as soon as possible.
10. Reviewer Recognition
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics greatly appreciates the voluntary contribution of reviewers, whose expertise and commitment are essential for maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of the journal.
As a token of appreciation, the journal may provide:
• Official Reviewer Certificates upon completion of the review process;
• Letters of Appreciation;
• Annual acknowledgement of reviewers, where applicable.
Reviewer confidentiality is maintained at all times unless disclosure is requested or explicitly permitted by the reviewer.
11. Benefits of Reviewing
Serving as a reviewer for the Journal of Sport Biomechanics provides an opportunity to contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge in sport biomechanics and related disciplines.
Reviewers also benefit by:
• Contributing to the improvement of scientific publications;
• Keeping up to date with current developments in their field;
• Supporting the integrity and quality of scholarly communication;
• Receiving formal recognition of their academic service through official reviewer certificates issued by the journal.
12. Further Information
Reviewers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the journal's editorial policies before accepting review invitations.
Additional information is available in the following sections of the journal website:
• Policies of Peer Review
• Publication Ethics
• Conflict of Interest Policy
• Ethical Principles for Medical Research
• Submission Instructions
For further assistance, reviewers may contact the Editorial Office.
Why Review for Journal of Sport Biomechanics?
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics values the expertise, professionalism, and dedication of its reviewers. Through their voluntary service, reviewers help ensure that published research meets the highest standards of scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical integrity, and academic excellence. The journal sincerely thanks all reviewers for their essential contribution to the advancement of sport biomechanics research.
The Editorial Board of the Journal of Sport Biomechanics sincerely appreciates the valuable contribution of reviewers. Peer reviewers play a fundamental role in maintaining the scientific quality, integrity, and credibility of the journal by providing objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.
These guidelines are intended to assist reviewers throughout the review process and to promote high standards of scientific peer review.
1. Reviewer Qualifications
Reviewers are selected based on their scientific expertise and research experience in sport biomechanics and related disciplines.
Preference is given to reviewers who:
• Hold a PhD or an equivalent academic qualification in a relevant field;
• Have an active publication record in recognized scientific journals;
• Possess expertise relevant to the submitted manuscript;
• Are able to provide objective, fair, and independent evaluations.
2. Before Accepting a Review Invitation
Before accepting an invitation to review, reviewers should ensure that:
• The manuscript falls within their area of expertise;
• They are able to complete the review within the requested review period;
• They have no financial, institutional, academic, or personal conflict of interest;
• They can maintain complete confidentiality throughout the review process.
If reviewers are unable to accept the invitation, they are encouraged to decline promptly so that another qualified reviewer can be invited without unnecessary delay.
3. During the Review
Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive comments that contribute to improving the scientific quality of the manuscript.
Comments should be:
• Objective and evidence-based;
• Respectful and professional;
• Clear and constructive;
• Focused on scientific merit rather than personal opinions.
Suggestions intended to improve the quality, clarity, and methodological rigor of the manuscript are highly appreciated.
4. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are encouraged to consider the following aspects when evaluating a manuscript:
• Originality and novelty of the study;
• Scientific significance and contribution to the field;
• Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
• Study design and methodology;
• Statistical analysis and interpretation of results;
• Ethical compliance;
• Clarity and organization of the manuscript;
• Quality of figures and tables;
• Adequacy and relevance of references;
• Validity of the conclusions.
5. Reviewer Recommendations
Following evaluation, reviewers are requested to recommend one of the following editorial decisions:
• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject
Reviewer recommendations are advisory in nature. The final editorial decision is made solely by the Editor-in-Chief after careful consideration of the reviewers' comments together with the journal's editorial policies, scientific standards, and ethical requirements.
6. Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.
Reviewers must not:
• Share manuscripts with others without permission from the Editorial Office;
• Discuss unpublished work with third parties;
• Use unpublished information for personal, academic, or financial benefit;
• Contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript.
Confidentiality should be maintained before, during, and after completion of the review.
7. Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should decline review invitations whenever any actual or potential conflict of interest could influence—or reasonably be perceived to influence—their judgment.
Examples include:
• Recent collaboration with the authors;
• Employment at the same institution;
• Financial relationships;
• Personal relationships;
• Academic competition.
Further guidance is available in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy.
8. Ethical Responsibilities
If reviewers identify possible ethical concerns during the review process, they should promptly notify the Editorial Office.
Such concerns may include:
• Plagiarism;
• Duplicate or redundant publication;
• Data fabrication or falsification;
• Image manipulation;
• Unethical research involving human participants or animals;
• Inappropriate authorship;
• Citation manipulation.
Reviewers should report concerns confidentially through the journal's editorial system and should not contact the authors directly.
9. Timeliness
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics highly values reviewers who provide thorough, constructive, and timely evaluations.
Reviewers are kindly requested to complete their reviews within the requested review period. If additional time is required, they are encouraged to inform the Editorial Office as soon as possible.
10. Reviewer Recognition
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics greatly appreciates the voluntary contribution of reviewers, whose expertise and commitment are essential for maintaining the scientific quality and integrity of the journal.
As a token of appreciation, the journal may provide:
• Official Reviewer Certificates upon completion of the review process;
• Letters of Appreciation;
• Annual acknowledgement of reviewers, where applicable.
Reviewer confidentiality is maintained at all times unless disclosure is requested or explicitly permitted by the reviewer.
11. Benefits of Reviewing
Serving as a reviewer for the Journal of Sport Biomechanics provides an opportunity to contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge in sport biomechanics and related disciplines.
Reviewers also benefit by:
• Contributing to the improvement of scientific publications;
• Keeping up to date with current developments in their field;
• Supporting the integrity and quality of scholarly communication;
• Receiving formal recognition of their academic service through official reviewer certificates issued by the journal.
12. Further Information
Reviewers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the journal's editorial policies before accepting review invitations.
Additional information is available in the following sections of the journal website:
• Policies of Peer Review
• Publication Ethics
• Conflict of Interest Policy
• Ethical Principles for Medical Research
• Submission Instructions
For further assistance, reviewers may contact the Editorial Office.
Why Review for Journal of Sport Biomechanics?
The Journal of Sport Biomechanics values the expertise, professionalism, and dedication of its reviewers. Through their voluntary service, reviewers help ensure that published research meets the highest standards of scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical integrity, and academic excellence. The journal sincerely thanks all reviewers for their essential contribution to the advancement of sport biomechanics research.
View: 4 Time(s) |
Print: 1 Time(s) |
Email: 0 Time(s) |
0 Comment(s)
Journal of Sport Biomechanics
Department of Sport Biomechanics, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan Branch, Prof. Mousivand Blvd, Imam Khomeini Blvd, Hamedan, Iran.
Journal Tel: +98 81 34494042
Website: http://biomechanics.iauh.ac.ir
Email: sportbiomechanics@iauh.ac.ir
