Reviewer Guidelines

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise. Reviewers are expected to be constructive by highlighting the problems and suggesting solutions and improvements, as well as pointing to the strong points of the manuscripts.

• Reviews should be conducted in the spirit of collegiality in substance and tone.
• The emphasis is on the academic merit within the context of the academic/research approach towards the study. For example, reflexive/interpretative/literary/exploratory/polemic/historical/critical or eclectic approaches must be reviewed theoretically and methodologically in the context of the nature of such approaches.
• Please ensure the confidentiality of the peer review process. Do not share, copy or discuss the manuscript with third parties during the review process.
• Please declare any conflict of interest to the Editor-in-Chief upon receipt of the manuscript.
• The reviewers should consider the quality of the article in terms of conceptual or empirical contribution to the field based on a strong conceptual premise, novel perspective and methodological rigour.
• It is expected that reviewers, where relevant, comment on such aspects as the title, introduction, problem statement/hypothesis, quality of literature review, the relevance of sources, appropriateness of research method and application, the relevance of analysis, clarity of writing, the significance of the contribution to the field's theory or practice.
• Make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief to:

1. accept – publish as is
2. revisions required (minor and moderate revisions)
3. resubmit for review (major revision required)
4. reject – article not suitable for publication
5. submit elsewhere (article is outside the scope of the journal)

To streamline the refereeing process, Communicare will appreciate feedback within 30 days of receiving an article or resubmission.