Thank you for taking the time to review the manuscripts submitted for publication. When you serve your colleagues by providing comments, you become part of the Peer Review Board.
Important points to remember during your review:
The purpose of the review is to assist the author in publishing their findings to contribute to the academic body of knowledge. As such, your goal with the review is to enhance the manuscript to improve the possibility of publication…not simply to point out issues and/or errors. For all concerns and criticisms, it is important to provide guidance on what the author(s) can do to improve their manuscript.
Focus your review on the manuscript, not the author. Keep all comments, concerns and criticisms constructive, valuable and informative.
While JIR is designed to help novice authors publish their work, the journal is also committed to publishing high-quality scholarship. As such, the peer review board is responsible for ensuring that information published by the journal follows sound scholarly principles.
Questions to consider for a global review:
What is the focus of the manuscript? Is this focus valid, important, and relevant?
What is the value of this manuscript for the reader? Are the findings or conclusions important, meaningful and timely?
Is the scope, intent and implications of the manuscript aligned with the focus of JIR?
Is the theoretical and/or empirical focus of the manuscript worthy of publication?
Does the information presented in the manuscript add value to our knowledge of the field?
The following papers have been submitted to JIR for potential publication. The first state of the publication process is dissemination for public review. Please read and comment on the following manuscripts. Comments should be professional, relevant and provide guidance to the author on potential avenues for improvement.
The following papers have been submitted to JIR for potential publication. The first stage of the publication process is dissemination for public review. Please read and comment on the following manuscripts. Comments should be professional, relevant and provide guidance to the author on potential avenues for improvement.