Then I look at how convincing the results are and how careful the description is. The parts of the Discussion I focus on most are context and whether the authors make claims that overreach the data. I want statements of fact, not opinion or speculation, backed up by data.Tags: Condoms In School EssayEffective Thesis Statement CharacteristicsPleasure Of Walking EssayFunny Essay AnswersEnglish Essay LearningDemand Evidence And Think CriticallyThesis On Teaching Methods
The only other factor I pay attention to is the scientific integrity of the journal.
I would not want to review for a journal that does not offer an unbiased review process.
I read the digital version with an open word processing file, keeping a list of “major items” and “minor items” and making notes as I go.
There are a few aspects that I make sure to address, though I cover a lot more ground as well.
I do this because editors might have a harder time landing reviewers for these papers too, and because people who aren't deeply connected into our research community also deserve quality feedback.
Finally, I am more inclined to review for journals with double-blind reviewing practices and journals that are run by academic societies, because those are both things that I want to support and encourage.
Having said that, I tend to define my expertise fairly broadly for reviewing purposes. I am more willing to review for journals that I read or publish in.
Before I became an editor, I used to be fairly eclectic in the journals I reviewed for, but now I tend to be more discerning, since my editing duties take up much of my reviewing time.
If the answer to all four questions is yes, then I’ll usually agree to review.
I am very open-minded when it comes to accepting invitations to review.