Preferably someone who has published and written on the subject matter in a journal and book. Most journals will choose a reviewer who has contributed to the journal on the same topic. It is as independent as that.

Please write here your name, surname, scientific degree, field, position at the university/high school, country

Not myself, but Prof. Anna Alon is one of the most knowledgeable experts in the field

المحاسب/ المدقق الداخلي/ استاذ الجامعة المتخصص

Any one who on the basis of relevant qualifications/experience could be a potential reviewer for any article, manuscripts etc

Well, if you have published a good paper and your paper contains some popular keywords in your field, a journal editor is more likely to come accross your paper, and invite you to review a paper.

The requirement to be a reviewer: Publish a good paper. Nothing more!

Thanks to all. This is a good chance to cooperate with each other asking to review even our own articles (if a journal will ask).

Reviewer should be from a particular field of research with at least 5 renowned journal publications to review the relevant research as a independent reviewer.

Yes Muhammad Zahid Rashid . That is why, I create this request to know who can review a book/article in Accounting, Statistics or Auditing in English. You know some journals (most indexed in SCOPUS) ask three or four experts/reviewers for your article while submitting. And it complicates by international requests (not from your country/university/etc). Especially, it makes it more difficult to find academics who know English (for example, in my country).

Yes, shkulipa. I agreed with your arguments. Monopoly is there at international level, mostly people supports their friends. Independent reviewership is question mark at international levels in many ways. Research ethics should be followed as a professional spirit and equally behaved to research materials in order to review.

Preferably someone who has published and written on the subject matter in a journal and book. Most journals will choose a reviewer who has contributed to the journal on the same topic. It is as independent as that.

Nice Dear Muhammad Zahid Rashid

Any expert in the field that the article or book is addressing, who has obtained PhD degree and published some journal articles or text books can be a reviewer.

I was reading somewhere that roughly 90% of the published mathematical research falls into oblivion sooner or later, but especially sooner (nobody is quoting, nobody is using, nobody cares). A good reviewer would try to reduce that percentage, wouldn't they? Not everything is going to be breathtaking, but still, some value & merit are required...

In my opinion, the requirements to become a reviewer varies from journal to journal. However, the general requirements are: (1) Educational qualification, (2) Reputation, (3) Adequate knowledge of the field, (4) Enough publications in the field, (5) Experience of reviewing articles, (5) Good reviews in the past, (6) Elapsed time for reviewing articles, and (7) Suggestion from the authors of a manuscript.

However, there is no device or clear line that can determine the quality of a reviewer. Besides, the requirements require to become a reviewer of any journal depends on the journal itself. if the quality of the journal is very high, the requirements increase.

The requirements to become a reviewer is as pointed out by Messr Badar Latif. however, in addition to those requirements is the availability of time at the disposal of the supposed reviewer. Timing is very crucial to journal house.

A good reviewer should assess the correctness of assumptions, conclusions, and theory. Did authors provide details on the limitations of their method and/or results? A good reviewer knows when and how to ask questions in an editorial context and asks not only “Why?” but often “Why not?” Be open minded. Having been selected as a reviewer, the Associate Editor has judged that you are familiar with or a practitioner of best practices within the topic of the paper. Do not let that familiarity with the best way of doing things blind you to new innovations. If a proposed workflow is impractical given today’s data quality or computational capability, the reviewer should request that the authors state the limitations in their discussion or conclusions. Innovative ideas that may not have commercial use in our profession today, may do so in the future, or may have a major impact in other areas of science and technology.