Ethics of peer reviewing

1. Metamorphosis uses a "single blind" peer review process in which the identity of the reviewers are not disclosed. The peer reviewer must therefore not have any contact with the author.

 2. Reviewers must ensure that the confidentiality of the peer review process and the propriety rights of those who have submitted the manuscript are protected.

3. Reviewers must decline a request to review manuscripts if they are aware of a conflict of interest or they should disclose the nature of the conflict of interest to the Editor.

4. Peer reviewers are asked to make every reasonable effort to ensure that the following criteria are applied when evaluating a manuscript:

• each manuscript should be assessed on its merits without regard to the race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority or institutional affiliation of the author
• the quality of the manuscript, its experimental and theoretical work, its interpretations and its exposition are judged objectively
• keep to the timeframes set out by the Editor
• your judgements are explained and supported

5. While the content of a manuscript may justify criticism, even severe criticism, under no circumstances is any personal criticism of the author appropriate or acceptable. You may be asked to reappraise a manuscript that was referred back to the authors after a first-round review. In cases where reviewers provide substantively different ratings, a manuscript will be sent to an arbitrator (typically a senior Editorial Board member) for a final verdict.