Reviewer Guidelines

 

Review policies of INPRESSCO do not reveal the identity of reviewers to author(s), and takes care to any identifying marks on reviews to maintain the reviewers' secrecy.

  • The first responsibility of reviewers is to respond by the date indicated within the message accompanying the manuscript. If you are unable to review or return the manuscript by that date, please notify the editorial office as soon as possible so that the manuscript can be sent out to   another reviewer without delay.
  • Review policies of INPRESSCO do not reveal the identity of reviewers to author(s), and takes care to any identifying marks on reviews to maintain the reviewers' secrecy.
  • The unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Reviewers are expected not to cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published, and to refrain from using the information it contains for the advancement of their own research.
  • The first responsibility of reviewers is to respond by the date indicated within the message accompanying the manuscript. If you are unable to review or return the manuscript by that date, please notify the editorial office as soon as possible so that the manuscript can be sent out to   another reviewer without delay.
  • The unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Reviewers are expected not to cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published, and to refrain from using the information it contains for the advancement of their own research.
  • If you believe that you cannot judge a given article impartially, please advise the editorial office with that explanation.
  • In comments intended for the author's, criticism should be presented impassively, and abrasive remarks avoided.
  • Even if we do not accept a paper, we still would like to pass on constructive comments that might   help the author(s) to improve it. Please give detailed comments that will help both the editors to   make a decision on the paper and the authors to improve it.
  • You are not requested to correct mistakes in grammar, but any help in this regard will be appreciated.
  • The editors gratefully receive reviewer's recommendations. However, a reviewer should not expect   the editors to honor his or her every recommendation since the editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources.

Evaluation criteria

In your review, please consider the following aspects as you evaluate the overall quality of the manuscript.

  • Importance:Is the content important to the relevant field and of interest to the journal's readers?
  • Originality:Does the paper present new, innovative or insightful information? Does it reflect current information on this topic?
  • Clarity:Is the purpose of the paper apparent or stated in the introductory section? Are any areas vague or difficult to understand? Are there any contradictions or inconsistencies? Does the paper   stay focused?
  • Arrangement:Are ideas developed and related in a logic sequence? Are transitions between discussions smooth and easy to follow? Is the content consistent with the purpose of the paper?
  • Accuracy:Is any information in the paper inaccurate? Are interpretations and conclusions sound?     Has the author accurately characterized what referenced literature relates? Do math or text errors appear in figures or tables?
  • Methodology:Appropriateness of approach or experimental design, adequacy of analytic or experimental techniques. Methods adequately described? Appropriate?
  • Results:Results relevant to problem posed? Credible? Well presented? Relevance of the figures and table, clarity of legends and titles.
  • Interpretation:Soundness of discussion and conclusions. Interpretation and conclusions warranted   by the data? Reasonable speculation?
  • References:Do the references represent authoritative sources of information? Have the most current references on this topic been included?