REVIEWERS - GUIDELINES

Reviewers - guidelines

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS/EVALUATORS

This section aims to guide the reviewers in their process of evaluating the articles.

The opinion of an evaluator aims to help in the choice of articles accepted for publication in the journal and contribute with the authors of the article to improve the quality of its publication. It is important to point out that the reviewers/evaluators are volunteers registered in the journal and chose to perform this task, aware that there will be no remuneration for their evaluation. They receive a certificate in each article they evaluate. Some important observations that the reviewer needs to elucidate:

1) Does the article meet the guidelines and policies of the journal?

2) Is it within the required formatting of the magazine?

3) Is the text well referenced (bibliography)?

4) Spelling and grammar meet the requirements of the language, which was submitted the article?

5) Is the theme relevant (scientific, social and institutional)?

6) Will the article contribute to the theme above?

7) Is there scientific materiality in the research carried out?

8) Does the text have methodological rigor?

9) Is the text original?

10) Do you have evidence and objectivity in the article?

These 10 steps should help to make your analysis objective and impartial, contributing to the quality of the articles published here. It is important that your opinion take a stand, and define the next steps for both the authors and the editors of the journal. So it is important when you receive the article, check if the topic is in your work or study area. Try to clearly expose the strengths and weaknesses of the article in order to give subsidies to the choice of accepted and rejected articles. Indicate whether the deficiencies of the article can be easily resolved in a matter of working hours or if they would require several weeks. It is important to approach the article with a critical view but with an open mind, to read it willing to learn from the experience of the authors. An opinion with constructive criticism is much more useful to the authors than an opinion extolling the wonders of the work done. Also avoid that your personal opinions and tastes influence your opinion too much. You have the right to criticize the approach adopted, there is no doubt, but remember that the plurality of ideas and approaches is extremely salutary. A good opinion points out both formal problems in the article (structural organization, quality of grammar and spelling, clarity of the text) and content problems (scientific, technological, philosophical, cultural, etc.). So it's good to start with deeper comments and suggestions and end with a list of point suggestions for spelling, grammar, and formatting corrections.

Click here to watch a 6-minute video on the topic.