Rating
Please score each item from 0 to 10. If for any criterion, your score is lower than 8, please justify your evaluation on the following pages. Please list any detailed recommendations for modifications and improvements on the following pages. Your ratings and comments will be shared with the author of the article.
Please use one of the below sets of evaluation criteria:
For articles in economics and management:
| Evaluation criteria | Score (0-10) |
| 1. Significance of Themes Is this a topic that needs addressing in Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies? Is the area investigated by the article: timely? important? in need of addressing because it has been neglected so far? filling a gap in current knowledge? By addressing these themes, does this article make a useful contribution? Is it itself significant? |
|
| 2. Relevance of Themes Are these themes relevant to this publication? |
|
| 3. Clarity of Thematic Focus Are the articles objectives and themes clearly stated? Does the article address them consistently? Is the structure of the article clear, in particular is it divided into: definition of objectives, presentation of research methods, analysis and conclusions? |
|
| 4. Relationship to Literature Does the article demonstrate an adequate understanding of the current literature in the field? Does it refer to previous research studies, not only textbooks or practitioner literature? Does it connect with the literature in a way which might be useful to the development of our understanding in the area it addresses? |
|
| 5. Research Design and Data Does the article present an original research (it could be both empirical study, as well as adequately structured literature review)? Has the research, or equivalent intellectual work upon which the article is based, been well designed? Does the article demonstrate adequate use of evidence, informational input or other intellectual raw materials in support of its case? |
|
| 6. Data Analysis and Use of Data Has the data been extensively analyzed? Has the data been used effectively to advance the themes that the paper sets out to address? |
|
| 7. Use of Theory Does the article use theory in meaningful way? Does it develop or employ theoretical concepts in such a way as to make plausible generalisations? |
|
| 8. Critical Qualities Does the article demonstrate a critical self-awareness of the author’s own perspectives and limitations? Does it show awareness of the possibility of alternative or competing perspectives? Does it contain a section outlining practical implications of the article findings? |
|
| 9. Clarity of Conclusions Are the conclusions clearly stated? How do you rate the cohesiveness of the article: do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper (such as theory, data and critical perspectives)? |
|
| 10. Quality of Communication Does the article clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the reading capacities of an academic, tertiary student and professional readership? What is the standard of the writing, including spelling and grammar (please bear in mind that the article should have been composed in British English)? |
|
| Total score (0-100) |
