Instructions for reviewers

*Questions to consider*

The main factors you should provide advice on as a reviewer are an originality, presentation, relevance, and significance of the manuscript’s subject matter.

Questions to have in mind when reading the manuscript:

Is the submission original?

Does the paper fit the scope of the journal?

Would the paper be of interest to the readership of the journal?

Does the paper help to expand or further research in this subject area?

Does it significantly build on (the author’s) previous work?

Do you feel that the significance and potential impact of a paper is high or low?

Is the paper complete? Is there an abstract or summary of the work undertaken as well as a concluding section?

Is the methodology presented in the manuscript and any analysis provided both accurate and properly conducted?

Are all relevant accompanying data, citations, or references given by the author?

Should it be shortened and reconsidered in another form?

Once you’ve read the paper and have assessed its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the editor regarding publication.  The specific decision types used by a journal will vary but the key decisions are:

Accept – if the paper is suitable for publication in its current form.

Minor revision – if the paper will be ready for publication after light revisions. Please list the revisions you would recommend the author makes.

Major revision – if the paper would benefit from substantial changes such as expanded data analysis, widening of the literature review, or rewriting sections of the text.

Reject – if the paper is not suitable for publication with this journal or if the revisions that would need to be undertaken are too fundamental for the submission to continue being considered in its current form.