Journal of Contract Management Reviewer Criteria Sheet
Be Specific
It is critical that you tell the author what the problems are and how these problems can be addressed. This should be in the form of specific comments, reactions, and suggestions. The more specific you can be, the more helpful your review.
Be Constructive
If the problems cannot be fixed in the current study, try to suggest how the author could improve the next attempt.
Identify Strengths
Although it is critical to point out weaknesses, it is equally important to identify strengths. Distinguish between limitations that can be fixed or modified and those that cannot. You are doing a great service to the field when you can help an author shape a manuscript into an insightful contribution.
Identify Contribution Level
As you review the manuscript, keep in mind the overall contribution offered. There is no point in publishing a technically correct and theoretically coherent paper if the contribution is not meaningful and interesting.
Be Mindful of Non-English Native Authors
Sometimes, you will be asked to review manuscripts written by non-English native authors. It is important for you to distinguish between the quality of the writing, which may be fixed, and the quality of the ideas that writing communicates.
Investigate Uncertain Issues
If you are uncertain about issues in your review, take a moment to check your facts, if possible. Incorrect statements in reviews reflect poorly on the editorial staff and the journal.
Personalize Your Review
Try to be “author-friendly” and imagine what you would say if you were speaking to the author in person.
Be Objective
If you have any doubt of your ability to be objective, please request not to review the particular manuscript.
Don’t Discuss the Manuscript
Do not discuss the manuscript with anyone other than the editor at any time.
Paper No._____
Reviewer_________________
Date of Review____________
Substance Checklist
Theory
- Does the manuscript have a well-articulated theory that provides conceptual insight and guide hypotheses formulation?
- Are the concepts clearly defined?
Method
- Does the sample, method of data collection, measurement, and statistical analyses ensure internal and external validity?
- Are the statistical procedures used correctly and appropriately?
Integration
- Does the empirical study provide a good test of the theory and hypotheses?
- Is the method chosen (qualitative or quantitative) appropriate for the research question and theory?
Literature
- Does the manuscript cite appropriate literature and provide proper credit to existing work on the topic?
- Have you offered critical references that the author missed?
Contribution
Does the manuscript make a new and meaningful contribution to the literature?
Citation
Have you given proper reference or citation to the original source of the comments that you write, if they are taken from another work or even your own?