CAPP

 

 

Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers’ selection is inside the decisive scope to maintain quality standards in a scientific journal. Therefore, Public Sciences & Policies has reviewers specialized in its many areas of publication, selected according evidenced experience through publications in scientific journals of quality, filiation, reputation in the scientific area, among other factors.

At the time that a reviewer is selected to evaluate a submission, the manuscript (without any kind of information from the authors) and the review form are send to the reviewer. In case of impossibility of compliance, it is expected that the reviewer inform the editorial board, allowing a new proper selection.

In order to assess a scientific paper, the reviewer must pay attention to the following questions:

Title

  • Is the title concise and informative?
  • Does the title accurately reflect the study?

Abstract

  • Is there a description of what was studied and why?
  • Is the aim stated and clear? Is it significance (scope, severity, relevance) discussed?
  • Do the authors indicate how the study was performed?
  • Do the authors include the important results?
  • Does the abstract include the authors’ conclusions?

Introduction

  • The issue in study is in the scope of Public Sciences and Policies?
  • Has the authors formulated a problem?
  • Is it clear why there is a need for the study in our society?
  • Is the aim clear?
  • Is the aim scientifically important?
  • Have other undertook similar studies?

Theoretical Framework

  • Is the theoretical framework selected adequate for the study? Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem?
  • Are the important concepts well defined?

Methodology

  • Is the methodology selected appropriate for the study?
  • Is the study approach/design clearly defined and described?
  • Is the study approach/design both valid and rigorous?

Results

  • Are the results presented in a logical manner?
  • Do the authors provide adequate data to support the results?
  • Is the data solid?
  • Is the presentation of the results balanced and unbiased?
  • Do the results provide an answer?

Discussion and Conclusion

  • Does the discussion/conclusion include the answer to the starting question?
  • Do the authors explain the meaning of the results?
  • It is clear what contribution the paper makes to the field of study?
  • Are potential limitation mentioned?
  • Are the conclusions valid and supported by the data?

References

  • Do the references show a proper knowledge of the literature in the field?
  • Do the references cited are relevant and adequate for the study?
  • Do the references cited are from quality scientific journals?
  • Do the author cited paper with five or less years?

 

In order to clarify any question, please contact the editorial board through the following email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

 

News