Instructions to IJoDS Peer Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to review this article. For IJoDs, the peer review is structured through four key pillars to ensure published articles are rigorous and field enhancing.

Peer Review is designed to evaluate whether an article:

Is Factual

Has an argument that is accessible and clear 

Is Centred in and supported by Scholarship

Is Enhancing the Field

The role of the peer reviewer is to be kind, clear and constructive whilst ensuring the article is meeting all four pillars. Criticism does not mean rip the article apart, it means evaluate closely and attentively that the work under review meets the four pillars of peer review. 

We have linked a document (named Reviewer Survey) with questions we would like you to answer after you have read the article. Please download it, and you can answer the questions in that document and upload that to PubKit or simply copy and paste your answers into the space for comments.

After due consideration, can you please choose one of the following recommendations for the editor:

Accept

Accept after minor revision

Major revision

Reject

Please provide feedback to authors and specific suggestions for improvements. Even if the article is rejected, your comments may result in greatly improved resubmissions, or new submissions, to this journal or other journals at a later date. Your anonymous status may make it seem like a thankless task, but the peer review system is critical to the quality of academic journals. As an author, we are sure you have appreciated the feedback you have received in the past as a result of the peer review system.

Thank you in advance for your assistance.