- For reviewers
- International Journal of Ornithology
Reviewer Guidelines
What the International Journal of Ornithology asks of reviewers, and how a constructive review is written.
Reviewing for JIO
Reviewers give editors an independent, expert assessment of a manuscript. Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request. Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.
For double-blind manuscripts, reviewers must not attempt to identify the authors.
What to assess
- Fit with the scope and the stated article type.
- Soundness of the study design, sampling and analysis, and whether the conclusions are supported by the data.
- Clarity of the species, locations, dates and methods reported, and the completeness of references.
- Ethics approval and permits for work with live birds, eggs or specimens where applicable.
- Availability of data and code, and a data-availability statement.
Write specific, courteous comments that the authors can act on, and separate major concerns from minor ones. State your recommendation to the editor clearly.
Conflicts, confidentiality and tools
- Decline the invitation if you have a conflict of interest or lack the expertise, and suggest alternative reviewers where you can.
- Treat the manuscript and your review as confidential, and do not share or use unpublished material.
- After submitting the review, reviewers should securely delete downloaded manuscript files and must not retain or use unpublished material.
- Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured.
Independence
Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal. Editorial decisions remain independent of fees, services, memberships and roles.