Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Update review.tex #1

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update review.tex #1

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
26 changes: 23 additions & 3 deletions src/review.tex
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@


\section*{Abstract}
During research one will face the situation to review a scientific publication.
During research one will face the situation to review a scientific publication. The main aim for reviewing a publication is to enhance the quality of it by evaluation and to be a part of scientific discussion by feedbacks.
Fortunately, many hints, tips, and checklists are available on the Internet.
This document aims to provide a template that includes input from several instructions and is mainly using Matthias Rupp: Review Checklist, 2008.
Which again is based on:
Expand All @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ \section*{General considerations}
\item If more brevity or detail is needed, say where
\item If you can not assess something, e.g. significance of contribution, say so
\item If you suspect fraud, plagiarism or duplicate publication, tell your editor about it immediately
\item Never abuse its function (suggesting citations, stealing ideas, etc.)
\end{itemize}

\chapter*{Review: \textcolor{HighlightColor}{\metaTitle}}\label{sec:review}\vspace{.5cm}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -97,11 +98,23 @@ \section{Main text body}\label{sec:main}
\item \textbf{Are all parts necessary?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\end{enumerate}

\section{Results}\label{sec:results}
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \textbf{Are the results summarized adequately, using quantitative terms?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is it clearly described how the data were analyzed?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are the chosen method appropriate for the research question?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is the descriptive and statistical anaylysis of the data appropriate?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are the data sufficient and presented in a way that allows the reader to reach a conclusion?}
\end{enumerate}

\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \textbf{Is no new material introduced?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is the focus only on the authors results?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Do the results support the conclusions?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is it clearly stated what the results mean in relation to the initial problem statement or hypothesis?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are possible limitations of the study described?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are the lessons learned described?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\end{enumerate}

\section{References}\label{sec:references}
Expand All @@ -118,14 +131,21 @@ \section{Figures and Tables}\label{sec:figures}
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \textbf{Is each figure/table necessary?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is a figure/table the right choice?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are all captions present and appropriate?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are all captions present and appropriate (sufficient to understand it without paper)?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is each figure/table referenced in the text?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Are tables readable (clear layout, no leading zeros, only significant digits)?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Is the quality of the figures good enough (sharpness, legend present, readable fonts, axes labelled)?} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\end{enumerate}

\section{Editor review}\label{sec:editorreview}
Following steps could be followed as a good approach for writing a feedback:
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item What did work well for you (try to find something)?
\item Include a summary of what you understood the paper is about.
\item What are you suggestions to revise the paper and to improve in general.
\end{enumerate}
Then make step by step suggestions of the following:
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \textbf{Importance of research question} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Originality/novelty of work} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Appropriateness and priority for publication} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
Expand All @@ -136,7 +156,7 @@ \section{Editor review}\label{sec:editorreview}
\item \textbf{Constructive criticism backed by references} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\item \textbf{Objectivity} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
\end{enumerate}

Then put everything together and send it along with your suggestion: Reject, Major Revisions, Minor Revisions, Publish as it is.
\section{Other Comments}\label{sec:other}
\begin{enumerate}[resume]
\item \textbf{Comments for the authors} \textcolor{HighlightColor}{((todo))}
Expand Down