Reviewer Guideline
Reviewer's Guideline
Review of Article Substance
In the review process, you are asked to assess the substance of the article according to the component standards that have been set. Please note that if there are significant differences in the content of the article, please share your comments.
- Title: The title of the article must be able to accurately and reflect the contents of the manuscript, without giving rise to multiple interpretations. If necessary, alternative suggestions for titles are provided
- Abstract: The abstract must be able to summarize the background, objectives, methods, results and conclusions of the research, this is the part that is always read in every scientific paper.
- Review of References: Authors are expected to be ready to acknowledge the contributions of other parties to the manuscript through citations. The citation in the introduction must be able to show the contribution of the novelty, the citation is done sufficiently and supports the content of the article.
- Purpose: The article is written with a purpose that is clearly outlined and is implied to be able to answer the hypothesis.
- Method: The method must be detailed and capable of providing sufficient information for a competent reader to be able to reproduce the author's work. Tools, materials, hardware and software, as well as the framework must be described.
- Delivery Management: The narrative in the article is very effective and can provide a rational explanation of the research subject.
- Replication: The article is not a replication of previous work descriptions. It is best to check replication abbreviation to reduce content. If not, then the reviewer can provide several comments related to this.
- Calculations: Randomly, the reviewer will verify the calculations made.
- Tables and Graphs:
- Tables and graphs are presented concisely, clearly and accurately.
- The title of the table and graph must be able to describe the presentation in the table or image.
- Titles in tables and graphs must describe the contents of the presentation.
- There is a correlation between text, tables and graphs with consistent statements.
- Conclusion: The hypothesis must be answered in the conclusion well, clearly, and supported by test data.
- References: Must be listed in the Bibliography. A minimum of 15 references with a composition of 60% as main references (journals, proceedings, books, theses) were published in the last five years.
Submission of Review Results
Reviewers agree to carry out the review, so they must download the manuscript file and attachments, fill in the review result comment form, upload the assessment results to the editor and/or author, and make recommendations regarding quality. The review is completed within a certain period (3 weeks). If additional time is needed, it must be submitted to the Editor.