2024年5月23日发(作者：申茉莉)
-----WORD格式--可编辑--专业资料-----
How to peer review?
General ideas
1. Don’t share the manuscript or to discuss it in detail with others. The reviewer should
maintain confidentiality.（对所评阅的文章必须保密）
2. To provide an honest, critical assessment of the work.
To analyze the strengths and weaknesses, provide suggestions for improvement, and
clearly state what must be done to raise the level of enthusiasm for the work.（对文章的
优缺点做出评论，并明确指出应该怎么修改才能提升现有的文章质量）
3. The reviewer should write reviews in a collegial, constructive manner. A carefully worded
review with appropriate suggestions for revision can be very helpful.（以建设性的、学
术性的口吻对文章进行评价，并给出建设性的修改再投递的意见）
4. Support your criticisms or praise with concrete reasons that are well laid out and logical.
（给出的评价应该附加有支撑观点的具体原因）
5. 评阅步骤：
(1) Read the manuscript carefully from beginning to end before considering the review.
Get a complete sense of the scope and novelty.
(2) Move to analyzing the paper in detail, providing a summary statement of your
findings and detailed comments.
(3) Use clear reasoning to justify each criticism and highlight good points and weaker
points.
(4) If there are positive aspects of a poor paper, try to find some way of encouraging the
author while still being clear on the reasons for rejection.（如果被拒绝的文章中有
部分闪光点，可以鼓励作者。但是要坚持拒绝的观点）
(5) A point-by-point critique is valuable. For each point, indicate how critical it is to your
accepting the paper.（逐点详述你的评论，并针对没一点给出你所能接收的文章
的评判标准）
(6) Finally, give the clear answer as to your recommendation for publication. !do not
give a rating.（在review的最后必须给出明确的关于接收与否的回答，不要以百
分度的形式给出不确切的答复）
How to peer review an article?
1. Comment on large issues first
（从整体上进行评价）
(1) Main point clear and interesting?
(2) Is it effectively organized?
(3) Are ideas adequately developed?
(4) Is evidence used properly?
(5) Is the research question clear and well justified?
(6) Is the technical approach logical and rigorous?
(7) How strong is the inference for the important conclusion?（得出结论的过程是否牵
强？）
(8) Are the results clear and statistically rigorous?
(9) Does the discussion flow logically from the introduction?
(10) Is there a clear and relevant topic sentence for each paragraph?
总的来说，主要是从全文的内容角度对文章的：结构组织性(well organized, good structure)、
--完整版学习资料分享----
-----WORD格式--可编辑--专业资料-----
逻辑性(logical)、严谨性(rigorous)、论据的合理性(justified, reasonable)、说服力(convincing)
等方面对文章进行总体评论。
2. Go on to smaller issues later
（对细节进行评价，包括每一段）
(1) Awkward or confusing sentences
(2) Style
(3) Grammar
(4) Word choice
(5) Proofreading（校正）
(6) Clarity and comprehensibility of content
(7) Accuracy
(8) Readability—in terms of logic, sequencing and flow
(9) Consistency—in the content language and use of key terms
总的来说，从细节部分考虑的主要是语言角度：纯从英语语言的角度对文章细节进行评价，包
括语法、词法、选词是否恰当、行文是否可读 (read-friendly)、是否native-like等。有的论文
可以对文章的各部分进行分步细节性评论：introduction, material and method, result, discussion,
conclusion.
3. Comment on whether the introduction clearly announces the topic and suggests the
approach that will be taken;
4. Comment on whether ideas are clear and understandable
5. Specify your own feelings about where you’ve stuck and why. How to revise to avoid
this stuck.
6. Try to describe what you see in the paper: what the main point and organization
pattern you think in this paper.
7. Identify what’s missing and needs to be explained more fully. Also what can be cut.
!!!!YES or NO questions a review should include and elaborated in details!!!!
(Elaborate these answers on language use, linguistic features and wording)
1. The article title is appropriate.
2. The abstract accurately reflects the content.
3. The purpose or thesis of the article is stated clearly.
4. The purported（声称的）significance of the article is explicitly stated.
5. The article adequately ties to the relevant literature.
6. The research study methods are sound and appropriate.
7. The literature review and research study methods are explained clearly.
8. The primary thesis is argued persuasively.
9. The writing is clear concise and interesting.
10. All figures, tables, and photos are necessary and appropriate.
11. The conclusions or summary are accurate and supported by the content.
12. The article is of interest to many URISA members.
Reviewer Recommendation:
（最后给出的接收与否的结论）
Please indicate which of the following actions you recommend.
( ) 1. Publish, no significant alterations suggested.
--完整版学习资料分享----
2024年5月23日发(作者：申茉莉)
-----WORD格式--可编辑--专业资料-----
How to peer review?
General ideas
1. Don’t share the manuscript or to discuss it in detail with others. The reviewer should
maintain confidentiality.（对所评阅的文章必须保密）
2. To provide an honest, critical assessment of the work.
To analyze the strengths and weaknesses, provide suggestions for improvement, and
clearly state what must be done to raise the level of enthusiasm for the work.（对文章的
优缺点做出评论，并明确指出应该怎么修改才能提升现有的文章质量）
3. The reviewer should write reviews in a collegial, constructive manner. A carefully worded
review with appropriate suggestions for revision can be very helpful.（以建设性的、学
术性的口吻对文章进行评价，并给出建设性的修改再投递的意见）
4. Support your criticisms or praise with concrete reasons that are well laid out and logical.
（给出的评价应该附加有支撑观点的具体原因）
5. 评阅步骤：
(1) Read the manuscript carefully from beginning to end before considering the review.
Get a complete sense of the scope and novelty.
(2) Move to analyzing the paper in detail, providing a summary statement of your
findings and detailed comments.
(3) Use clear reasoning to justify each criticism and highlight good points and weaker
points.
(4) If there are positive aspects of a poor paper, try to find some way of encouraging the
author while still being clear on the reasons for rejection.（如果被拒绝的文章中有
部分闪光点，可以鼓励作者。但是要坚持拒绝的观点）
(5) A point-by-point critique is valuable. For each point, indicate how critical it is to your
accepting the paper.（逐点详述你的评论，并针对没一点给出你所能接收的文章
的评判标准）
(6) Finally, give the clear answer as to your recommendation for publication. !do not
give a rating.（在review的最后必须给出明确的关于接收与否的回答，不要以百
分度的形式给出不确切的答复）
How to peer review an article?
1. Comment on large issues first
（从整体上进行评价）
(1) Main point clear and interesting?
(2) Is it effectively organized?
(3) Are ideas adequately developed?
(4) Is evidence used properly?
(5) Is the research question clear and well justified?
(6) Is the technical approach logical and rigorous?
(7) How strong is the inference for the important conclusion?（得出结论的过程是否牵
强？）
(8) Are the results clear and statistically rigorous?
(9) Does the discussion flow logically from the introduction?
(10) Is there a clear and relevant topic sentence for each paragraph?
总的来说，主要是从全文的内容角度对文章的：结构组织性(well organized, good structure)、
--完整版学习资料分享----
-----WORD格式--可编辑--专业资料-----
逻辑性(logical)、严谨性(rigorous)、论据的合理性(justified, reasonable)、说服力(convincing)
等方面对文章进行总体评论。
2. Go on to smaller issues later
（对细节进行评价，包括每一段）
(1) Awkward or confusing sentences
(2) Style
(3) Grammar
(4) Word choice
(5) Proofreading（校正）
(6) Clarity and comprehensibility of content
(7) Accuracy
(8) Readability—in terms of logic, sequencing and flow
(9) Consistency—in the content language and use of key terms
总的来说，从细节部分考虑的主要是语言角度：纯从英语语言的角度对文章细节进行评价，包
括语法、词法、选词是否恰当、行文是否可读 (read-friendly)、是否native-like等。有的论文
可以对文章的各部分进行分步细节性评论：introduction, material and method, result, discussion,
conclusion.
3. Comment on whether the introduction clearly announces the topic and suggests the
approach that will be taken;
4. Comment on whether ideas are clear and understandable
5. Specify your own feelings about where you’ve stuck and why. How to revise to avoid
this stuck.
6. Try to describe what you see in the paper: what the main point and organization
pattern you think in this paper.
7. Identify what’s missing and needs to be explained more fully. Also what can be cut.
!!!!YES or NO questions a review should include and elaborated in details!!!!
(Elaborate these answers on language use, linguistic features and wording)
1. The article title is appropriate.
2. The abstract accurately reflects the content.
3. The purpose or thesis of the article is stated clearly.
4. The purported（声称的）significance of the article is explicitly stated.
5. The article adequately ties to the relevant literature.
6. The research study methods are sound and appropriate.
7. The literature review and research study methods are explained clearly.
8. The primary thesis is argued persuasively.
9. The writing is clear concise and interesting.
10. All figures, tables, and photos are necessary and appropriate.
11. The conclusions or summary are accurate and supported by the content.
12. The article is of interest to many URISA members.
Reviewer Recommendation:
（最后给出的接收与否的结论）
Please indicate which of the following actions you recommend.
( ) 1. Publish, no significant alterations suggested.
--完整版学习资料分享----