Good Practice in Refereeing - from Geo-Publishing.org - a useful source on how to be a good manuascript reviewer
Dear Reviewers: Tourism Geographies currently acceptes all manuscript reviews through the Manuscript Central website only: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/rtxg
Our old review form, below, may be used as a guideline fo the types of issues that you should consider in reviewing papers submitted to Tourism Geographies.
It is the policy of Tourism Geographies to provide an efficient and
expeditious review of all submitted papers. With this in mind, referees
are requested to return their evaluations within one month of receipt of the
manuscript. If this is not possible, then referees are requested to inform
the manuscript's coordinating editor or the journal's editor-in-chief as soon
as possible. Helpful comments for the author(s) are appreciated.
Contact the Editor for additional questions: Alan A. Lew <alan.lew at nau.edu>
| Please rate and comment (in Parts B & C) this paper on: |
Acceptable |
Some Revision Required |
Unacceptable |
| 1. Importance of Issues Raised: | |||
| 2. Adequacy of Literature Review: | |||
| 3. Rigour of Methodology Employed: | |||
| 4. Rigour of Analysis (appropriate interpretation): | |||
| 5. Clarity of Writing, Explanations, and Concepts: | |||
| 6. Suitability of Illustrations and Table (too many, too few, clarity): | |||
| 7. Adequacy of Abstract (accurate summary of entire paper) and Keywords (up to 6): | |||
| 8. Adequacy of Introduction (purpose and rationale): | |||
| 9. Adequacy of Conclusions: | |||
| 10. Accuracy of the Title: | |||
| 11.Contribution to the Study of Tourism: |
*you agree to review a revised and resubmitted paper
Part B - Evaluation Comments to be forwarded to the Author(s) - In particular,
please address issues that you rated as Requiring Some Revision or Unacceptable,
above. (these comments may be submitted on a separate sheet)
Part C - Confidential Comments for the Editor (optional)