Guidelines for Reviewers

Purpose and Principles of Peer Review

Functional Thin Films and Energy Materials relies on independent expert reviewers to evaluate the originality, scientific quality, reliability, and significance of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining scholarly standards and helping editors make informed publication decisions. All assessments should be objective, evidence-based, constructive, and fair, irrespective of authors' institutional affiliations or backgrounds.

Scope, Scientific Evaluation, and Methodological Rigor

Reviewers at Functional Thin Films and Energy Materials should assess whether manuscripts are relevant to the Journal's aims and scope and make a meaningful contribution to functional thin films, energy materials, and related technological applications. Particular attention should be given to the originality and significance of the research, adequacy of the literature review, clarity of objectives, scientific soundness, and relevance of the findings.

Depending on the nature of the manuscript, reviewers should evaluate material synthesis and fabrication techniques, deposition procedures, material composition, experimental design, structural and functional characterization, measurement procedures, analytical methods, device integration, and performance evaluation. They should also consider the transparency, reproducibility, and reliability of the reported methods, including the appropriateness of experimental controls, statistical analyses, and comparisons. Results and conclusions should be consistent with the available evidence, with limitations and uncertainties appropriately acknowledged. The clarity of data presentation, illustrations, references, and overall scientific writing should also be considered.

Accepting Review Invitations and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should accept invitations only when the manuscript falls within their expertise and sufficient time is available to complete the assessment. Any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest, including recent collaboration, institutional affiliation, financial interests, personal relationships, or direct academic competition, must be disclosed to the editor. Reviewers should decline assignments where impartiality may be compromised. Reviews must not be delegated to another person without prior editorial authorization.

Confidentiality and Double-Blind Review

Functional Thin Films and Energy Materials follows a double-blind peer-review process. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts, supplementary materials, editorial correspondence, and all information obtained during evaluation. They must not attempt to identify authors, disclose their own identities, or share manuscript content with unauthorized individuals. Manuscript information must not be used for personal or professional advantage or entered into public AI platforms that may retain or disclose confidential material. Any permitted AI-assisted support must comply with the Journal's applicable policy and must not replace independent reviewer judgment.

Research Ethics and Publication Integrity

Reviewers should remain alert to potential concerns involving plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and other research integrity violations. Any suspected misconduct should be reported confidentially to the handling editor with relevant details or evidence. Reviewers should not independently investigate allegations or contact authors regarding suspected misconduct.

Preparing Constructive Review Reports

Reviewer comments should be clear, specific, respectful, and directed toward improving the manuscript. Major scientific or methodological concerns should be explained with appropriate justification, distinguishing essential revisions from recommendations for improvement. Personal criticism, discriminatory language, unsupported allegations, and unnecessary requests to cite the reviewer's own publications should be avoided. Confidential comments to the editor may address ethical concerns, conflicts of interest, or significant doubts about the reliability of the research. Substantive scientific comments intended to guide authors should also be included in the report shared with them.

Recommendations and Review Deadlines

Reviewers of Functional Thin Films and Energy Materials should recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection based on the manuscript's scientific merit and overall quality. Reports should be submitted within the specified timeframe, and any delay communicated promptly to the editor. For revised manuscripts, reviewers should verify that previous concerns have been adequately addressed.

Reviewer Recognition and Editorial Responsibility

Functional Thin Films and Energy Materials values the time and expertise contributed by its reviewers. Reviewers are expected to maintain professional conduct, fulfil their commitments, and support a fair and transparent editorial process. Their recommendations serve as expert advice; the final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or designated editor.

By accepting a review assignment, reviewers agree to uphold the Journal's confidentiality requirements, publication ethics, and commitment to rigorous and constructive scholarly evaluation.