use this sheet as a guide to assist you in formulating your comments
on the referee evaluation sheet. Your comments will assist the author
when revising the manuscript.
- Does the subject fall
within the general scope of the journal?
- Is this a new and original
contribution? (For review articles this need not necessarily apply)
- Are interpretations and
conclusions sound, justified by the data and consistent with the objectives?
the answers to any of the above three points are negative, please give
clear arguments for rejection of the paper on the following referee
evaluation sheet. If the answers to the above three points are positive,
then please continue with the following.
- Does the title clearly
reflect the contents?
- Is the abstract sufficiently
informative, especially when read in isolation?
- Are appropriate keywords
- Is the description of
materials and methods sufficiently informative?
- Are the results and conclusions
- Is the organisation of
the article satisfactory (e.g. no discussion in results)?
- Are the figures and tables
all necessary, complete (e.g. titles) and clearly presented?
- Are the references adequate?
- Is the English correct
and understandable to a trans-disciplinary readership?
Please encircle the option of your choice and specify
your choice below.
manuscript is acceptable in its present form
manuscript will be acceptable after minor revision
manuscript will be acceptable after moderate revision
manuscript will be reconsidered after major revision
manuscript is not acceptable for publication