Instructions for reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to review this article. The following questions may help you in providing feedback to the author:

1. Do the title and abstract reflect the content of the article adequately?
2. Is the purpose of the research stated well?
3. Is the significance of this research explained relative to the existing literature?
4. Are there adequate references to other research?
5. Is the article clearly written and well organized?
6. Are there any typographical and syntactical errors?
7. Does the paper offer new insights and contribute to the development of the subject?
8. Considering its content, is the length of the article appropriate?
9. Does the article need to be proofread by a native English speaker?
10. Is the language clear and jargon-free? Would it be accessible for someone from a different discipline?

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

• Accept
• Accept after minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

Please offer additional comments and provide feedback to authors about faults in their paper 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, I’m sure you have appreciated the feedback you have received in the past as a result of the peer review system.

Many thanks in advance for your assistance. Your time and expert opinion are very much appreciated.