Reviewer's Guideline

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWING A MANUSCRIPT

We believe that to ensure the quality of research, we need to take the help from our reviewers. Without their help, ensuring the quality and timeliness of the publication is not possible. After accepting to review the manuscript sent to you, kindly make sure that you complete the review in a week time and not later than that. Reviewers should put themselves into authors’ shoes and should service their need from that perspective. You need to be sure that you are competent enough to review the article in time. Another thing you would be interested to know is the fairness of review. You must be fair and just in reviewing a submitted research article, a case study, a book review or a literature survey.

Please answer the following questions, if applicable, while reviewing a submitted article.

1.    Is the subject matter suitable for the intended audience?

2.    Does this article contain new ideas or useful synthesis of existing material?

3.    If the article contains tables, figures, or appendices, are they useful? Which, if any, could be deleted?

4.    Are the references satisfactory and according to APA 6th Edition?

5.    Is the length of the article appropriate to the subject matter is considers?

6.    Is the article clearly written?

7.    Is the title suggestive of the article’s content?

8.    Is the article appropriately organized and are the headings indicative of content?

9.   Are methods appropriate, clear and current so that it helps others in defining their methodologies? 

10. Does the manuscript have the clear implications for future research?

11. Is statistical design and analysis appropriate, correct and supported by a well written interpretation?

12. Are ideas and arguments presented in a meaningful way?

 

European Journal of Business and Social Sciences recognizes that the quality of a refereed publication rests chiefly on the impartial judgment of their volunteer reviewers. An editorial board or program committee should approach an individual reviewer rarely and only with a manuscript that both comes under the reviewer's expertise and meets the journal guidelines.

Thus reviewers can expect EJBSS to:

  • Preserve their anonymity
  • Ask them if they are ready to review before the submission is sent to them. The deadline for the review will accompany its request.
  • Deliver guidelines on what constitutes a reviewing conflict of interest
  • Demand them to review only submissions for which the editor feels they have expertise, and appeal only a restricted number of reviews over the course of a year
  • Distinguish that they have the right to decline a requested review
  • Give a reasonable length of time for a review, where the precise length of time depends on the publication
  • Not routinely ask them to make up for delays presented by other participants in the reviewing cycle
  • Not ask them to provide reviews for submissions that do not satisfy either specified publications requirements (e.g., page count restrictions) or which are obviously inappropriate for the publication
  • Acknowledge their efforts in the publication process, while preserving confidentiality of which submissions they reviewed
  • May Notify them of the editorial decisions for the submission, including the author-visible portion of reviews
  • Can Tell them who will see their review
  • Identify that reviewers own the copyright for their reviews.


And EJBSS expects Reviewers to:

  • Make known to the demanding editor any possible conflicts of interest
  • Review the submission by the agreed-upon deadline
  • Recognize the charter and reviewing standards and procedures of the publication
  • Read the complete submission carefully, prepare the review with care, apply skilled judgment, use suitable language in a review, and fill out provided review forms in full
  • Adequately document in their review the reasons behind their recommendations
  • Review subsequent revisions of a submission that they originally reviewed, should the editor feel that is appropriate
  • Preserve the confidentiality of the existence and status of submissions of which the reviewer becomes aware
  • Not use/practice results from submitted works in their works, research or grant proposals, unless and until that material appears in other publicly available formats, such as a technical report or as a published work
  • Not distribute/allocate/give a submission to anyone unless permitted by the editor handling the submission
  • Preserve the anonymity of the other reviewers, should they become known to that reviewer.
Site Map | Printable View | © 2008 - 2017 European Journal of Business and Social Sciences | HTML 5 | CSS