(This text represents adapted version of Elsevier’s reviewer guidelines)
Dear reviewers, please consider following issues when preparing review report:
a) Ethical issues:
If you think that the manuscript plagiarizes other work, please immediately inform the editor and also indicate the original source. The manuscript will be automatically disqualified and the author will be banned from submitting other works to the journal.
If you doubt that the data is falsified, please immediately inform the editor regarding this issue.
If you have impression that either manuscript or methods violate scientific ethos, please inform the editor.
Avoid any potential conflict of interest. If you recognize the work of the former student or colleague, please inform the editors regarding this issue.
The manuscript is a confidential document and it cannot be shared with anyone unless permitted or negotiated with the editorial board. Our journal employs the policy of blind review, consequently, the identity of the reviewer will be kept confidential from the authors.
c) Quality of the manuscript
You will be required to submit a short report which will discuss following aspects of the article:
Is the manuscript interesting for publication?
Does the manuscript suggest novelty to the scientific knowledge in the corresponding field?
Abstract: does it correspond to the text?
Introduction: as usual, the introduction summarizes relevant research in the field. Here the author should clearly summarize research problem.
Literature review: in this section the author should discuss relevant literature. The journal especially values those manuscripts which critically assess theoretical background and prepare ground for the empirical part.
Methods: does the author clearly explain the methodology employed for the research? How relevant are they for investigating the problem? How detailed and clearly are summarized main aspects of data collection process? If you question the methodology or its clarity, please inform the editor.
Results/discussion: does the author clearly summarize data analysis results? Are the conclusions drawn from the empirical evidences? How does the author link together the results and the theoretical background?
Language issues: reviewer is not obliged to change language of the manuscript. The editorial board conducts primary screening of the papers considering the quality of the used language too, however, if you feel that the text does have language-related problems, please inform the editors regarding this issue.
You would have three options for deciding the final fate of the manuscript. They can be: a) accepted “as it is”, in the current format; b) accepted after revision based on your comments; or c) rejected from publishing in the journal.
Editorial board is thankful for your time and effort dedicated to the review the manuscript!