Information for reviewers
发布时间:2008年12月07日        点击数量:4196

JCQU-E Reviewer Guide

Dear Professor,

 

Thank you for your willingness to invest your time and effort in reviewing for Journal of Chongqing University English Edition (JCQU-E).

This peer review is to be done anonymously. The editor relies on you to identify the strengths and weaknesses in the paper and hence determines whether the paper is qualified for publishing in a scholarly journal. Your comments should also help the author write a better, more readable, paper.

An article to be published in the journal should be technically correct, be of high scientific quality and have significant impact in a subfield. It should contain enough technical information to enable peers to corroborate results and follow the details of the work described.

The editor and the author will be very much obliged to you if your can return your report in four weeks, very preferably in two weeks. If in any condition you feel like you cannot complete the review in time, please notify us without delay.

We list below a series of questions to help you with the specific aspects of the paper we rely on you to judge from. Beside the answers to these questions, we need your expertise to help the author with constructive comments.

 

1.    Is the paper a new and original contribution? If a research paper, has this work been published elsewhere? If so, please provide references to this. If a scientific review, is it sufficiently comprehensive and critical?

Answer:

2.    Does it give adequate references to related work? (suggest key references that were omitted)

Answer:

3.    Does the title clearly and sufficiently reflect the content?

Answer:

4.    Is the abstract informative and sufficient to present the importance of the research? If not, please suggest amendments

Answer:

5.    Are the keywords satisfactory? If not, please suggest amendments.

Answer:

6.    Are the applied methods suitable

Answer:

7.    Do the results contain remarkable statements?

Answer:

8.    Are the interpretations and conclusions sound and justified by the data?

Answer:

9.    Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable?

Answer:

10.  Are the presentation and organization satisfactory?

Answer:

11.  Does it contain material that might well be omitted? If so what?

Answer:

12.  Are the scientific and technical terms correct and accurate?

Answer:

13.  Is the English satisfactory? If only minor changes are needed, please insert corrections in the margins of the manuscript.

Answer:

14.  How do you rate the quality of this paper, Excellent, Good, Moderate, or Poor?

Answer: Technical content in terms of theory is   

and of application is   ;

Overall quality is   ;

English writing is   .

15   What is your recommendation?

Accept – without revision

Accept - with minor revisions as listed in comments

Accept - with major revisions as listed in comments

Reconsider - after major revisions as listed in comments

Reject - fragmentation/lack of novelty or significance as indicated in comments

Reject - scientific illogicality as indicated in comments

Reject - other reasons as indicated in comments

16   Please list further comments or specific suggestions you would like to provide the author with. Do not include your advice on acceptance here.

Comments:

Copyright ©2008 All rights reserved.
Organizer:Ministry of Education Sponsor:ChongQing Univetsity
Address: E-mail:
Designed by Beijing E-Tiller Co.,Ltd.