Economical Referee Report
ANSWER
- Summary of the Paper: Begin your report with a summary of the paper. This should include:
- The main research question(s) addressed by the authors.
- A brief overview of the methodology used by the authors in their study.
- The key conclusions and contributions of the paper.
- Importance and Convincingness: Discuss whether the research questions posed in the paper are important to the field or not. Address the following:
- Whether the research questions have practical or theoretical significance.
- Whether the authors effectively justify the importance of their research.
- Your assessment of how convincing the paper is overall, and your reasons for this assessment.
- Discussion of Concerns: Address any concerns or weaknesses you identify in the paper. These could include:
- Issues with the quality or representativeness of the data used in the study.
- Problems with the empirical methods employed (e.g., statistical analysis).
- Sample selection issues (are the chosen samples representative of the broader population?).
- Possible alternative explanations for the results that the authors did not consider or did not adequately address.
- Any other weaknesses or limitations you identify in the paper.
- Suggestions for Improvement: Since referee reports are intended to provide constructive criticism, offer suggestions for how the authors could improve their paper. Provide specific recommendations for addressing the concerns you mentioned above, such as:
- Suggesting ways to enhance the quality or reliability of the data.
- Proposing alternative methods or analyses that could strengthen the paper’s findings.
- Recommending ways to address possible alternative explanations for the results.
- Offering ideas for expanding the paper’s scope or addressing any gaps.
- Final Thoughts: Conclude your report by reiterating your overall assessment of the paper. Mention any positive aspects that you appreciated, and summarize the key points you discussed in your report. End on a positive note, encouraging the authors to address the concerns and implement the suggestions you provided.
Remember that your goal is to provide feedback that helps the authors improve their paper and contribute positively to the academic community. Your feedback should be specific, constructive, and focused on the scholarly merit of the work.
QUESTION
Description
Sorry about the words below, its too hard to copy them to here, so I attached the requirement document and the articles to be commented!
Arefereereportisacriticalpartofthepeer‐reviewprocessinacademicresearch.Whenanarticleissubmittedtoanacademicjournalforpossiblepublication,theeditorofthejournalsendsoutthepapertoseveralexpertswhoarefamiliarwiththetopicandwhocanevaluatethecontributionsandlimitationsofthesubmittedarticle.Eachrefereewritesareport,whichisthebasisforarecommendationtotheeditoronwhethertoacceptthepaperforpublication,tosuggestthattheauthorsreviseandlaterresubmitthepaperforpublication,ortorejectthepaperforpublication.Sinceeachpaperbelowhasalreadybeenpublished,youdonotneedtoprovidethissummaryrecommendation,butyourreportshouldconsistofallofotheraspectsofarefereereport.Yourreportisintendedfortheauthorsofthepaper.Itshouldbeapproximatelythreedouble‐spacedpagesinlength,anditshouldincludethefollowingparts:2Asummaryofthepaper,whichdiscussesthemainresearchquestion(s),themethodologyusedbytheauthors,andtheconclusionsandcontributionsofthepaper.Adiscussionofwhetherthequestionorquestionsaskedareimportant(ornot)and whether you find the paper convincing or not(andwhy?)Discussion Of The Concerns Havewiththepaper.Theseconcernscouldberelatedtothedatabeingused,theempiricalmethods,sampleselectionissues(do the data seem to be a representative sample?),possiblealternativeexplanationsfortheresultsthattheauthorsdonotconsider(ordo not consider sufficiently),andanyotherweaknessesofthepaper.Finally,arefereereportismeanttobe constructive criticism,so,whenever possible,providepossiblesuggestionsfor improvement.