MANUSCRIPT REVIEW COMMENTS - Tourism Geographies
Good practice in refereeing - from Geo-Publishing.org - a useful source on how to be a good manuascript reviewer
This form is for anonymous review of manuscripts submitted to Tourism Geographies. You can use this form in any of the following ways:
  1. Print this form and submit it by regular mail or fax, or
  2. Download this file to your computer and open it with your word processor, then e-mail the completed form, or
  3. Open this file in an HTML editor (such as Netscape Composer, which comes free with Netscape Communicator) and complete the form and then send it by e-mail, or
  4. Click here to download MS Word or Wordperfect versions of this form, which can be completed and submitted by e-mail, regular mail or fax. (Also available: a generic version of this form.)
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.

Editor: Alan A. Lew <alan.lew@nau.edu> fax:+1-928-523-2275
Associate Editors: C. Michael Hall <cmhall@business.otago.ac.nz> fax:+64-3-479 9034
Shaul Krakover <shaul@bgumail.bgu.ac.il> fax: +972-8-627-8991
Allan M. Williams <A.M.Williams@exeter.ac.uk> fax: +44 (0) 1392 263342

last updated 26 September 2004 - Click Here to Return to TG Homepage

Review DUE DATE: ________________   Referee Number or Name: ___________________________

Manuscript Number: ________________________________

Manuscript  Title: _____________________________________________________________________

Part A - Assessment Scale

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:      
 
Do you recommend the paper for:

____  Acceptance as is
____  Acceptance subject to revisions
____  Rejection, but recommend major revisions and resubmission to the review process*
____  Rejection

*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)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


return to TG homepage