Knowledge and Information Systems
|
Paper Number:
Paper Title:
Author(s):
Name of Editorial Board Member:
Name of Reviewer (if different from EB member):
Date Sent:
Date to be Returned:
RATINGS OF PAPER
[Please rate the following by entering a score between -3 to 3
with 0 being the average based on the following guidelines:
3: | Strong Accept (As good as any top paper in reputable journals) |
2: | Accept (Comparable to good papers in reputable journals) |
1: | Weak Accept (I vote acceptance, but won't argue for it) |
0: | Neutral (I don't like it, but I won't object if others like it) |
-1: | Weak Reject (I would rather not see this paper accepted) |
-2: | Reject (I would argue to reject this paper) |
-3: | Strong Reject (Definitely detrimental to the journal quality if accepted)] |
Originality of the paper: Technical soundness: Significance: Clarity of presentation: Relevance to KAIS: - Is the paper topic on the KAIS topic list? ( ) yes ( ) noLENGTH (relative to the useful contents of the paper)
About right: Should be shortened: Should be extended: If the paper should be shortened, please indicate an expected number of pages (in its submission format) to be removed:OVERALL RECOMMENDATION
Reject: Accept with no changes: Accept subject to minor revisions: Author should prepare a major revision for a second review: (Not applicable if the paper in question is itself a major revision of a previously reviewed paper.) If a major revision, will you be willing to re-review a revised version of this paper? Yes ( ) No ( ) (An "no" answer is equivalent to a reject recommendation.) If the paper is accepted, it should be published as a regular paper: short paper:A SHORT SUMMARY OF THE RATIONALE FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION (5 lines expected)
DETAILED COMMENTS FOR AUTHOR(S)
CONFIDENTIAL COMMENTS TO THE EDITORIAL BOARD