|
|
|
International Journal of Business & Management Science PRINT: ISSN 1837-6614; ONLINE: ISSN 1985-692X A 21 Century Journal of Business and Management Science |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
Required format for proposing reviewer Issues to be examined during review
The two objectives of requesting for two potential reviewers' details with the submission for possible publication of an article are:
i. to increase journal's resource base ii. to develop review skill of young experts.
Reviewers information can be given in the following format:
Reviewer I
Reviewers name:............. Contact details:................. Email address:....................
Reviewer II
Reviewers name:............. Contact details:................. Email address:.................... It is not necessary to send biography of the reviewers. Issues to be examined during review
Reviewing journal article needs substantial experience and knowledge in the subject matter to help editors of a journal to make a decision. The primary purpose of reviewing manuscripts is to ascertain whether it is within the range of subjects and scope of the international standard of scholarship, and that the manuscript is in style and content of the highest professional quality. Table 1 and 2 reveals the major and minor aspects of a standard review report respectively, which are adapted based on the various reports including CFA (Commonwealth Forestry Association (2006), Brown (2004), Fahamu (2006) and Nature (2006). These two tables have been presented here are exactly from the article published by Safa, M.S. (2006)[Reviewing Scientific Genre: A Noble Conscientiousness to Research Community, International Journal of Management and Entrepreneurship (ISSN 1823-3538), 2(1):1-20].
|
Table 1. Major aspects of a standard review report to evaluate a manuscript
|
Major aspects |
|
|
Title |
Does it reflect the purpose and content of the paper in a short form? |
|
Abstract |
Does it effectively and concisely represent the content of the manuscript? Does it highlight the findings and conclusion of the paper? |
|
Introduction |
Is the background of the study clearly, adequately but briefly discussed to justify the importance of the research problem. Is the situation which created the research problem is convincingly and coherently described and critically analyzed? Is this description adequately phrased for a diverse international readership to understand? |
|
Literature review |
Are the contemporary literatures relevant to the study reviewed adequately? |
|
Theoretical aspect |
Is the theory sufficiently sound, and supported by the evidence? Is it testable? Is it preferable to competing theories? Is the manuscript theoretically grounded? |
|
Methodological aspect |
Are the methodology, data and analyses sound? Is the statistical design and analysis appropriate? Are the choice and availability of materials for study and the methodological approach (including mathematical statistics) appropriate, adequate and feasible? Is the description clear, simple and accessible for a diverse international readership? Is the choice supported by an adequate critical review of the international literature? |
|
Results |
Are the findings discussed appropriately and in a ‘to the point’ manner? |
|
Synthesis |
Are the findings original? Are the findings synthesized adequately and compared with other national and international relevant studies? |
|
Conclusion |
Are the conclusions justified, consistent with the content and result of the section? |
|
Reference |
Is the reference section made by following the respective referencing style? Is the manuscript free of citation problem such as a reference is cited in the text but not in the list or vise-versa? |
Table 2. Minor aspects of a standard review report to evaluate a manuscript
|
Minor aspects |
|
|
Structure |
Is the manuscript logically developed and appropriately subdivided and subtitled? Is there consistency between the subsections of the manuscript? |
|
Style and Presentation |
Is the manuscript easy for a diverse readership to read? Is it written in plain scientific or technical English? Are the terminologies correct? |
|
Length |
Does the manuscript justify its length? |
|
Illustrations and Tables |
Do they suitably and adequately supplement the text? Do the captions explain their contents satisfactorily that they can be understood without reference to the text? Are their design adequate and their information content relevant, sufficient and accurate/precise? |
|
Ethics |
Does the research work consider ethical issues? Is the article covered by appropriate licensing or ethical approval? |
Copyright © 2050 Society for Alliance, Fidelity & Advancement. Last modified: 04/21/22. All Rights Reserved