Reviewers-Guidelines

R
Reviewer Guidelines
  Criteria reviewers use to evaluate manuscripts submitted to JEThAL.

When assessing a manuscript, reviewers are asked to consider the following aspects:

Presentation
Does the paper relate to a cohesive argument? Are the ideas clearly presented?
Writing
Does the title characterize the manuscript? Is the writing concise and easy to follow?
Length
What portions of the paper should be expanded? Removed? Condensed? Summarized? Combined?
Title
Is the title concise, omitting terms that are implicit and, where possible, a statement of the main result or conclusion presented in the manuscript? Abbreviations should be avoided within the title.
Abstract
Does the abstract consist of: (1) the aim of the study; (2) the method; (3) the result or finding; and (4) the conclusion?
Introduction
Clearly describing, respectively:
  • The background of the study;
  • State of the art - relevant research that justifies the novelty of the manuscript;
  • Gap analysis and a novelty statement;
  • Hypothesis or problem statement (optional);
  • Approach to resolve the problem; and
  • The aim of the study.
Methods
  • The method is written clearly, so that other researchers can replicate the experiment or research with the same result;
  • Not only describes the definition of terms but also explains how the research is conducted;
  • Describes the location, participants, research instrument, and data analysis.
Result and Discussion
  • The data presented has been processed (not raw data) into a table or figure and given a supportive description that is easy to follow.
  • The result is related to the original questions or objectives outlined in the Introduction.
  • The author describes whether the result is consistent with what other investigators have reported, or whether there are differences.
  • The author provides a scientific interpretation for each result or finding presented.
  • The author describes the implications of the research.
  • The author describes the limitations of the research or drawbacks to the method or position.
  • The author describes further needs or areas for research, or an expansion of ideas.
Conclusion
Consists of:
  • An answer to the objectives of the research;
  • Implications or recommendations (optional);
  • Written in a paragraph, not in bullets or numbering.