Information for Reviewers

An entry to the Interaction-Design.org Encyclopedia should be evaluated according to the editorial policy plus normal scientific criteria.

Editorial policy

The Interaction-Design.org Encyclopedia is about making research accessible and about presenting a complex and central term in a way that allows the reader to:

  • understand the term
  • understand how and by whom it has been researched and which research has contributed to the development of the term
  • its relevance to the research community and to practitioners
  • learn how to learn more about the term

Background on the editorial policy

It is essential for reviewers to understand the 'genre' and goals of the encyclopedia. Therefore, you should read how contributors are instructed to write their entries. This link opens in a new window

Normal scientific criteria

You have reviewed the following Encyclopedia Entry :

Title:

Please evaluate the Encyclopedia entry according to listed criteria.

Evaluation

Question

Mastery of language of Encyclopedia entry

Style and presentation of Encyclopedia entry

Coherence of arguments

Amount of references and discussion of previous work

Quality of illustrations

Readability (i.e. how understandable is the text?)

Your comments

In the box below, you may comment on any aspect on the entry. For example, you may ask yourself: Is the entry easy to understand? Does the text have a good ‘flow'? Does it provide a good introduction to the term? Does it provide information on where and how to learn more? Is it not lengthy enough? Does it not include enough references (i.e. pointers to literature on how and by whom the term has been researched)? Does it constitute an important addition to the encyclopedia?


Will be sent anonymously to the author

Your Concluding Recommendation

Place indicate your recommendation for acceptance:

 

Accept (with optional revision)

The Encyclopedia entry can be accepted as it is; the author is expected to make minor revisions according to reviewer and editor viewpoints.

Suggestions for improvement:

Will be sent anonymously to the author
 

     

 

Develop – minor revisions

The Encyclopedia entry cannot be accepted as it is, but is a clear candidate for acceptance. Only minor revisions are needed.

Suggestions for improvement:


Will be sent anonymously to the author
 
     

 

Develop – major revisions

The Encyclopedia entry cannot be accepted as it is, but it is worthwhile starting an editorial process to improve the entry.

If you have marked the entry as worthwhile developing (requiring major revisions), the editors will initiate an improvement process involving the author, a chief editor, and a member from the editorial board. Please indicate the points where you see a need for improvement. Your comments will be read by the people responsible for the development process. In which areas does the entry need development?


Will be sent anonymously to the author

If the reviewed entry needs a major revision, can you help improve it?  



     


Reject

The Encyclopedia entry cannot be accepted as it is, and it is not worthwhile starting an editorial process.

Please indicate your main reasons for rejection. Try to be constructive. What are the problems with the entry? What may be done to overcome the problems?

Will be sent anonymously to the author


Your details

Your name (the reviewer):

The review is blinded, your identity is only known to the reviewing board

Your email:

The review is blinded, your identity is only known to the reviewing board








Changes to this page

31 Mar 2006: Thanks to sysiac.org, from where this editorial policy has been inspired and adapted
 

Random Tip

An article published in 'Nature' provides evidence that online articles have greater impact and are more highly cited!

 
 

Page Copyright Notice

© All rights reserved . See the copyright page for full details.
 
 

Page information

Author(s): Mads Soegaard
How to cite/reference this page
URL: http://interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/information_for_reviewers.html