![]() However, I defined three major issues which need to be addressed:ġ. I believe that the manuscript shows a lot of promise, and makes a valuable contribution to our understanding of criminal harassment charges in the Canadian context. Reviewer comments ‘major revisions’ example 1 This paper addresses the evolution of criminal law on harassment in Canada based on an analysis of legal verdicts between 19. “The line of argumentation should be improved by dividing the manuscript into clear sections with subheadings.” “The discussion and conclusions are difficult to follow and need to be rewritten to highlight the key contributions of this manuscript.” “I think that the manuscript can be improved by removing section 4 and integrating it into section 5.” However, I struggled to understand section 3.1.” “I believe that the manuscript addresses a relevant topic and includes a timely discussion. I believe that several additional tables and figures can improve the authors’ argumentation.“ ![]() However, I was missing more detailed insights in the actual results. “The authors work with an interesting dataset. For instance, I would like to see more interview quotes and a more transparent statistical analysis.” “I encourage the authors to provide more in-depth evidence. “The empirical evidence is at times insufficient to support the authors’ claims. “The literature review is promising, but disregards recent publications in the field of…” In my opinion, the authors cannot make their current claims without considering writings on…“ “The theoretical framework is promising but incomplete. “The key argument needs to be worked out and formulated much more clearly.” However, their main argument is unclear.” “The authors of this manuscript have an ambitious objective and draw on an interesting dataset. I strongly encourage the authors to address the following points.” However, it also has several shortcomings. “The manuscript sheds light on an interesting phenomenon. At the same time, I identified several issues that require the authors’ attention.” “I enjoyed reading this manuscript, and believe that it is very promising. However, some major revisions are needed before it can be published.” “This manuscript addresses a timely topic and makes a relevant contribution to the field. “The manuscript shows a lot of promise, but some major issues need to be addressed before it can be published.” Sample peer review comments for a ‘major revisions’ verdict Note that too many structural issues in a manuscript often result in a ‘ revise and resubmit‘ decision. Thus, they need to be deleted, reordered or rewritten. Some sections are illogical or unclear: At times, some sections or paragraphs are difficult to follow.In some manuscripts, this evidence is insufficient, and more detailed information, calculations, examples, figures, tables or quotes are needed. However, these claims have to be supported by convincing evidence. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |