Reviewer Guidelines

The Reviewer Guidelines of Package Printing are intended to support reviewers in providing high-quality, fair, and constructive evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to assess submissions objectively, focusing on originality, technical merit, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, and overall contribution to engineering and multidisciplinary research. Reviews should be thorough, evidence-based, and written in a professional and respectful tone. Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and should not share, discuss, or use the content for personal or professional advantage prior to publication.

Under Competing Interests, reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts that could influence, or appear to influence, their impartiality. Such conflicts may include financial interests, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, recent collaborations, or direct academic competition with the authors. If a reviewer identifies a significant competing interest, they should promptly inform the editorial office and decline the review assignment. Transparency in declaring competing interests is essential to preserving the credibility and integrity of the peer-review process.

The Ethical Responsibilities of reviewers include maintaining confidentiality, ensuring objectivity, and upholding the highest standards of academic integrity. Reviewers should avoid personal criticism of authors and should clearly identify relevant published work that has not been cited. Any suspicion of plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, or other forms of misconduct should be reported confidentially to the editors. Reviewers are expected to complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or notify the editorial office promptly if delays are unavoidable.

The Review Process follows a structured and impartial approach designed to ensure quality and fairness. After an initial editorial assessment, manuscripts are assigned to qualified reviewers with appropriate subject expertise. Reviewers submit detailed reports and recommendations to the editors, who make final decisions based on the reviewers’ evaluations and the journal’s editorial standards. The process may involve one or more rounds of revision, during which reviewers may be asked to reassess revised manuscripts. The journal is committed to a transparent, timely, and ethical review process that supports scholarly excellence and contributes to the advancement of engineering and multidisciplinary research.