Reviewer’s views about the article are regarded highly by the Editorial Board, since the decision about whether to accept or reject will essentially be given accordingly. Reviewer is expected to comment evidently about the contribution of article to the related field, and also explain clearly why the article should be accepted or rejected.

 At the end of review process, reviewer might suggest to:

A)     "Accept"

B)     "Accept with minor revision: Reviewer's re-evaluation not required "

C)     "Accept with major revision: Reviewer's re-evaluation required"

D)     Reject

the article.

When the suggestion is either B, C or D, reviewer should clearly explain why.

Article should be reviewed by the following criteria:

1. Overall layout

2. Narrative clarity

3. Presentation of aim, hypothesis and research question

4. Design and methodology of research

5. Linking subject with related literature

6. Sufficiency of data analysis

7. Linking aim with findings

8. Linking comments with findings

9. Compliance with rules of language and related field’s jargon

10. Novelty/contribution level
11. Plagiarism/Originality