Your role

Peer review supports the editors in deciding on a manuscript and helps authors to improve it. The journal follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewing is double-blind: you do not know who the authors are, and they do not know who you are. See the Peer Review Process.

Before you accept

• Accept only if the manuscript is in your area of expertise and you can review it in the time you are given. The target for the whole review process is 4–8 weeks.
• Declare any competing interest, and decline if it would affect your judgement. See Reviewer Competing Interests.
• If you think you know who the authors are, tell the editor.

What to evaluate

• Originality and a clear contribution to ethnomathematics.
• Soundness of the theory, method, data, and analysis, and whether the conclusions follow from the findings.
• Treatment of culture and communities, and the ethical basis of the research. See the Ethical Clearance Statement.
• Use of literature, clarity of writing, and the quality of figures and tables.
• Compliance with the Author Guidelines.

Writing the report

• Give comments that are specific, constructive, and polite. Criticise the work, not the authors.
• Support each point with reasons and evidence.
• Give confidential comments for the editor in the separate field, and comments for the authors in the main field.
• Recommend one of the outcomes: accept without revision, minor revision, major revision, or reject. The editors make the decision. See Editorial Decisions and Revision.

Your duties

• Keep the manuscript and the review confidential. See Peer Review Confidentiality.
• Do not use the content for your own research before publication.
• Do not upload the manuscript to AI tools. See AI in Peer Review.
• Report any concern about plagiarism, duplicate publication, or misconduct to the editor. See Publication Ethics.

Questions

Write to ethnomath@uny.ac.id.