1. The referee must notify the Journal on her/his approval to evaluate the research work submitted for publication therein.

2. The referee must notify the Journal on her/his disapproval to evaluate the research work sent to her/him if there is a mismatch with her/his area of specialty or a conflict of interests by virtue of personal or intellectual relations, etc. with the author(s).

3. The referee must comply with the confidentiality standards related to the refereeing process by refraining from leaking any information relevant to the research work sent to her/him- whether related to the researcher's name or the research's title.

4. The referee must comply with the standards of objective refereeing by fully dropping off their subjective mask during the process of refereeing. Also, she/he should not offend or insult the researcher regardless the referee's opinion on the research level of quality.

5. The referee must show the reason of rejection or the amendment requirements, be they major or minor, alongside with their respective correction.

6. The referee must reveal any point of intersection (plagiarized material) with other research works, be they partial or full, together with the justifications thereof (plagiarism or the like).

7. The Journal (Editorial Board) is committed with varying the referees by setting up information bank on a list of renowned, trustworthy and impartial and highly-competent ones.

8. The Journal (Editorial Board) does not send research works to unqualified referees, particularly those who clearly show inability to explain why a research work is rejected or accepted.

9. The referee must provide the Journal with a bank statement and complete personal information in order to give her/him a financial reward of (100) US dollars (or its equivalent in Jordanian Dinar) in return for the refereeing process.