Reviewer Guideline

The Responsibility of the Peer Reviewer

The peer reviewer is responsible for critically reading and evaluating an article in their specialty field, and then providing respectful, constructive, and honest feedback to authors about their submission. It is appropriate for the peer reviewer to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, ways to improve the strength and quality of the work and evaluate the relevance and originality of the article.

Before Reviewing

Please consider the following:

• Does the article you are being asked to review match your expertise?
  If you receive an article that covers a topic that does not sufficiently match your area of expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible. Please feel free to recommend an alternate reviewer.
• Do you have time to review the paper? Finished reviews of an article should be completed within two weeks. If you do not think you can complete the review within this time frame, please let the editor know and if possible, suggest an alternate reviewer. If you have agreed to review a paper but will no longer be able to finish the work before the deadline, please contact the editor as soon as possible.
• Are there any potential conflicts of interest? While conflicts of interest will not disqualify you from reviewing the article, it is important to disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, please do not hesitate to contact the editor.

The Review

JTAKEN has completed the assignment with a review form which includes an assessment of the title, abstract, content, and references used. The review can be done on the form or directly in the article file. The reviewer could provide additional comments and any reference documents for the article's improvement if it is needed.

When reviewing the article, please keep the following in mind:

• Content Quality and Originality
• Clarity and Organizations

Is the article sufficiently novel and interesting to warrant publication? Does it add to the canon of knowledge? Does the article adhere to JTAKEN's standards? Is the research question an important one? In order to determine its originality and appropriateness for the journal, it might be helpful to think of the research in terms of what percentile it is in? Is it in the top 25% of papers in this field? You might wish to do a quick literature search using tools such as Scopus to see if there are any reviews of the area. If the research has been covered previously, pass on references of those works to the editor.