Guide to Referees

The Dyke 

Peer reviewers play a central role in ensuring the academic quality, rigour, and integrity of The Dyke. This guide outlines the expectations, responsibilities, and procedures for referees involved in the journal’s double-blind peer review process.

Purpose of Peer Review

The goal of peer review is to provide an objective, thorough, and constructive assessment of submitted manuscripts to:

  • Ensure scholarly quality and integrity
  • Support authors in improving their work
  • Guide editorial decisions on acceptance, revision, or rejection

Reviewer Responsibilities

As a referee for The Dyke, you are expected to:

Maintain Confidentiality

  • Treat the manuscript and review process as confidential.
  • Do not share, store, or distribute the manuscript without the editor’s consent.

Provide Objective and Constructive Feedback

  • Critically assess the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses.
  • Offer clear, detailed, and respectful comments that support improvement.
  • Avoid personal remarks or dismissive language.

Identify Ethical Issues

  • Report any concerns about plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or other ethical irregularities to the editor immediately.

Declare Conflicts of Interest

  • Inform the editor if there is any potential conflict of interest (personal, professional, financial) and recuse yourself if necessary.

Respect Deadlines

  • Submit your review within the agreed timeframe. If you are unable to meet the deadline, notify the editorial office as soon as possible so alternative arrangements can be made.

Evaluation Criteria

You will be asked to comment on and assess the manuscript using the following core criteria:

  • Originality: Is the work novel and significant?
  • Relevance: Is it relevant to the scope and aims of The Dyke?
  • Structure and Clarity: Is the article clearly written, logically organised, and well presented?
  • Methodological Rigor: Are methods appropriate, clearly described, and robust?
  • Literature Engagement: Does the manuscript engage meaningfully with existing research?
  • Findings and Interpretation: Are results clearly presented and properly interpreted?
  • Contribution to the Field: Does the article add new insights or perspectives?

Recommendation Options

Your review should include a recommendation from one of the following:

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions required)
  • Reject (does not meet standards or suitability for the journal)

Anonymity and Integrity

The Dyke follows a double-blind review process: authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. Please ensure that your comments are professional, impartial, and focused on the content, not the presumed identity of the author.

Reviewer Recognition

While the peer review process is anonymous, The Dyke acknowledges the invaluable contributions of reviewers. Where appropriate and with consent, we may offer formal recognition or reviewer certificates.

If you have any questions or concerns about a review assignment, please contact the editorial office at  editorinchief@thedyke.msu.ac.zw 

Thank you for your contribution to maintaining the quality and credibility of scholarly publishing.