|
Guidelines for OMEGA Reviewers
General
The goal of OMEGA’s review process is to evaluate the accuracy and
significance of the submitted manuscripts and to provide the authors with
constructive and timely feedback.
All submissions are to be reviewed for overall fit according to the Aims
and Scope of the Journal. Please see www.OmegaJournal.org/aims.html.
The Editor-in-Chief first screens all submissions.
It is OMEGA policy to use a single-blind review process by at least two
referees. (i.e., referees know the names of the authors but authors do not
know the names of the referees). The primary responsibility of the referees
is to review the paper with respect to correctness and exposition. Referees
are free to comment on whether the article fits well with the journal
objectives but the Editor-In-Chief makes the ultimate decision on that.
OMEGA requests that all referees complete their reviews within 6 weeks
in order to permit prompt feedback to the authors. Revised papers should be
reviewed within 4 weeks.
Items to look for
Here are some items the reviewer should consider during the review
process:
Does this manuscript make a substantial contribution to the literature?
Is the topic appropriate?
Is the literature review appropriate?
Is the paper intellectually stimulating?
Are the procedures, methods and data analysis appropriate?
Is the paper technically sound?
Should material be omitted or added?
Should material be moved to or from an appendix?
Is the paper clearly written?
Is there a concise abstract?
Is the grammar satisfactory?
Are the references complete?
Is the title appropriate?
Does the paper have applied value?
Referee Report (http://www.ees.elsevier.com/omega/default.asp)
(you will need to login EES as a reviewer)
The referee report may contain two parts.
|
·
|
The first part is to the Editor to be shared with the
authors.
|
|
·
|
The second part is to the Editor only and will include
candid recommendations and a summary judgment; this will not be shared
with the authors.
|
In the first part of your report please include:
Summary – include a short summary of the paper.
Major comments – list all changes you would like to see in
the paper.
Minor comments – typos, length reduction, indicate whether
you wish to see/no need to see the revised paper
Recommendation – Accept; minor revisions; major revisions;
reject. Include the reasons for your recommendation
Please submit your report via EES. You may also upload a .doc or .pdf
type files of your report.
Conceal Your Identity:
Authors can find your identity by clicking on the file properties. To
conceal your identity please see instructions by click here
The Editor-In-Chief wishes to gratefully acknowledge all those
listed who have generously given of their time to referee the paper
submitted to OMEGA. All members of the
Editorial Advisory Board are expected to review papers, thus are not listed
in the above list.
Acknowledgement to referees (From September 13, 2003 to
September 24, 2004) click here
Acknowledgement to referees (From September 25, 2004 to July 26,
2005) click here
Acknowledgement to referees (From July 27, 2005 to May 4, 2006) click here
Acknowledgement to referees (From May 5, 2006 to March 15, 2007)
click here
Acknowledgement to referees (From March 16, 2007 to March 31,
2008) click here
|
