Research Notes Reviewer Guidelines 

As a reviewer, you are expected to find the strengths of a paper as well as the weaknesses.  When stating strengths be specific about what you liked about the paper. When stating weaknesses, use this as an opportunity to  explain your concerns and offer suggestions. For example, uncover how the work may be novel even if it may appear to be incomplete.  Throughout the reviewing process, be sure to remain professional.

1. Overall Rating - This should not consider your preference for the paper being accepted as a GRAND Research Note

2. Expertise - Rate your expertise in the research area of the paper that you are reviewing (be honest but also give yourself credit)

3. Importance of Contribution and Research Problem - Summarize the contribution of the paper and the research problem that the authors are addressing, and then provide your analysis of the importance of this contribution based on your expertise. It is very important to provide details to support your score even if your score was high.

4. Originality and Innovation - Provide detailed explanation of the originality and innovation of the work that is being described in the Research Note. Please cite other works if you feel that novelty/originality is lacking.

5. Clarity, writing quality and formatting - Please comment on the clarity of expression and formatting. Please provide specific examples, and provide suggestions.

6. General Comments - Please explain your overall rating by providing details of why you support acceptance or rejection of this Research Note. It is important to provide details in this section. You should provide both positive and negative comments. Remember to be respectful to the authors.

7. Comment to the Committee - This will be hidden from the Authors, so if you have concerns around this work that you feel cannot be shared with the authors, please include them here.