Reviewer instructions

General guidelines for consideration by reviewers include an initial reading of articles to have an overview of articles. During initial reading, referees may check the quality, consistency, and clarity of the article. Referees may then proceed to an in-depth review of the work section-by-section. Reviewers are required to be objective in the reviews and should provide evidence for their responses where necessary. Reviewers are also required to assess individual articles following relevant reporting guidelines. The following sections are assessed depending on the article type. 

Topic and content

Is the topic relevant for the journal?

Is the content important to the field?

Is the work original? (If not, please give references)

Title

Does the title reflect the contents of the article?

Is the title descriptive, clear, and concise?

Abstract

To what extent does the abstract reflect aspects of the study: background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions?

Introduction and objective(s)

Is the study rationale adequately described?

Are the study objectives clearly stated and defined?

Methods

Are the methods adequately described?

Are the methods of data analysis appropriate?

Do the results answer the research question?

Are the results credible?

Is statistical significance well documented (e.g., as confidence intervals or P-value)?

Are the findings presented logically with appropriate displays and explanations?                                                               

Ethical Consideration

If there are issues related to ethics, are they adequately described? (For human studies, has ethical approval and informed consent been obtained?) 

Is the paper free from personalities, and special or commercial interests?

Results

Are the methods adequately described?

Are the methods of data analysis appropriate?

Do the results answer the research question?

Are the results credible?

Is statistical significance well documented (e.g., as confidence intervals or P-value)?

Are the findings presented logically with appropriate displays and explanations?

Discussion

How well are the key findings stated?

To what extent have differences or similarities with other studies been discussed and reasons for these given?

Are the findings discussed in the light of previous evidence?

Are the implications of these findings clearly explained?

Is the interpretation warranted by and sufficiently derived from and focused on the data and results?

Conclusion(s)

Do the results justify the conclusion(s)?

References

Are the references appropriate and relevant?

Are they up to date?

Are there any obvious, important references that should have been included and have not been?

Do the references follow the recommended style?

Are there any errors?

Suggestions for improvement

Referees are encouraged to provide suggestions on methods or data that can improve the current or future articles.

Writing

Is the paper clearly written?

Is the paper presented logically (e.g., correct information in each section, logical flow of arguments)?

Are there problems with the grammar / spelling / punctuation / language?

Rating for paper

Referees are required to give an overall score of the articles out of 100%.

Publication recommendations

Reviewers are required to give recommendations on publication of articles supported by evidence. Accept as is without modifications,  2. Accept with minor modifications, 3. Request major revision and re-review, or 4. Reject 

This section has been adapted from AJOL.

Using the online review system

JOGECA uses the Open Journal System platform hosted on the journal website.  The referee is sent an email notification with a review request, initiated by the editorial office. The email notification contains instructions about the actions needed at each stage along with the link to the respective manuscript (accessible only after login). 

The Public Knowledge Project provides a free online course on how to become a Reviewer including guidance on the use of the OJS system. If you have additional questions or concerns, please contact the editorial (editorialassistant@jogeca.com).