PL EN RU

Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets


Guide for Reviers

All reviews have to be written up in electronic form and send to Editors via email: jmcbem@wz.uw.edu.pl. The evaluation form can be accessed here: download form.

 

Before you complete your evaluation form of the article, please take account of the guidelines given below.

 

Do you feel your expertise matches the problems covered in the article?  Accept an invitation from editor if you are competent to review the article.

 

Is there a potential conflict of interest? if you work in the same department or institute as one of the authors; if you have worked on a paper previously with an author; or you have a professional or financial connection to the article – please list all of this (or more) when responding to the editor’s invitation for review.

 

Do you have enough time? As the reviewing of an article can be quite time consuming, please make sure that you will have sufficient time before the deadline stipulated in the invitation to conduct a thorough review. If you feel the review will take you longer to complete than normal, please contact the editor to discuss the matter.


Ethical issues. If you suspect that an article is plagiarized work, please let the editor know, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible. Also if you suspect the results in an article to be untrue (because of e.g. data manipulation) discuss it with the editor.

 

Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Consequently, they must not be presented to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the editor. Also, remember that unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research, unless the author(s) consent of has been obtained. Valuable ideas accessed through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.


Reviewer identity is not shared with the author.  We would like to keep your identity secret from the author(s). To help us protect your identity, please do not reveal your name within the text of your review.

 

Originality

Is the article sufficiently novel and interesting to warrant publication? Does it add to the canon of knowledge? Does the article adhere to the journal'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.

 

Structure

Layout and format
Authors are required to adhere to the journal’s Guide for Authors, which includes manuscript presentation. If the difference is extreme and the editor has not mentioned this issue in the request to review, you may wish to contact your editor to discuss it. Otherwise, you should note this in your review. If the paper is otherwise good, the editor may choose to overlook the formatting issues (for example, if the author comes from outside the discipline but has something valuable to convey to the readers of this journal). Other times, editors may ask the author to restructure the paper before publication.

 

Title
Does it clearly describe the article?

 

Abstract
Does it reflect the content of the article?

 

Introduction
Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated? Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context, and explain what other authors' findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis(es) and the general experimental design or method.

 

Graphical abstracts and/or highlights
Where these are included, please check the content and if possible make suggestions for improvements. Do the figures and tables inform the reader, are they an important part of the story? Do the figures describe the data accurately? Are they consistent, e.g. bars in charts are the same width, the scales on the axis are logical. 

 

Method
Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected? Is the design suitable for answering the question posed? Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research? Does the article identify the procedures followed? Are these ordered in a meaningful way? If the methods are new, are they explained in detail? Was the sampling appropriate? Have the equipment and materials been adequately described? Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?


Results
This is where the author(s) should explain in words what he/she/they discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted. Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.

 

Conclusion/Discussion
Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable? Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and to earlier research? Does the article support or contradict previous theories? Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?

 

Language
If an article is poorly written due to grammatical errors, while it may make it more difficult to understand the science, you do not need to correct the English. You should bring this to the attention of the editor.


Previous Research

If the article builds upon previous research does it reference that work appropriately? Are there any important works that have been omitted? Are the references accurate?

AASBI
Uniwersytet Warszawski
PRME
MBA
Ceeman
ACCA
HR Excellence in Research
Eduniversal ranking
Eduniversal
Ministerstwo Nauki
Polska Komisja Akredytacyjna

© Copyright: Wydział Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego

ul. Szturmowa 1/3, 02-678 Warszawa
tel: +48 22 55 34 002, fax: +48 22 55 34 001; mail: wz@wz.uw.edu.pl

NIP: 525-001-12-66

 

Administratorem strony jest Sekcja Informacji i Promocji WZ UW

 

 

projekt: VisualTeam Logowanie dla pracowników