Conceptual/Theoretical Paper Review Form
Please complete this form by bolding the number that corresponds to your opinion about each of the items. When you have completed the form, please save it to your computer, then upload it to Manuscript Central as an attachment to your Score Sheet. Your written comments should be typed or pasted into the appropriate box of the Score Sheet in Manuscript Central.
Review of literature: |
|
Describes an approach or learning issue that is not relevant to the decision sciences
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Describes an approach or learning issue relevant to the decision sciences
|
|
Does not do a good job of citing appropriate literature related to the approach or learning issue
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Outstanding review of relevant literature related to approach or learning issue
|
|
Does not cite relevant theoretical literature
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Strongly grounded in relevant theoretical literature, such as education, organizational behavior or psychology
|
|
Did not reference earlier articles in DSJIE
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Referenced earlier articles in DSJIE
|
|
Description of the innovative approach:
|
|
Confusing or incomplete description of the approach or learning issue
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Approach or learning issue is clearly described
|
|
Topic is uninteresting, old
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Topic is really interesting, state of the art
|
|
Weak motivation; did not inspire me to go on
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Article is well-motivated; made me want to read it
|
|
Discussion:
|
|
Choppy discussion
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Discussion flows smoothly
|
|
Focuses on summary of articles, with little attempt at synthesis
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Discussion synthesizes literature effectively
|
|
Hard to see how this could develop into future research
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Lays the groundwork for future research
|
|
No propositions included
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Includes a set of propositions about the effect of the approach or learning issue
|
|
Propositions poorly done or not included
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Propositions are well done and will inspire good research
|
|
Nothing new or very interesting
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Article presents significant new insight
|
|
Overall impression:
|
|
Research does not follow standards for academic research; inappropriate for a high quality journal
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Based on rigorous academic standards; appropriate for a high quality journal
|
|
Poorly organized, difficult to follow
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Well-organized, clearly written
|
|
Trivial
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
Highly significant, breaks new ground
|