The form below (largely quoted from Byrne, 1998, pp. 162-163) is intended to help peer reviewers critique a manuscript based on an empirical study.
Peer Review Form
With a red pen, mark the sections that require clarification.
Highlight areas in which the wording or numbers are confusing or incorrect.
Describe the three major weaknesses of this paper:
Check any of the following areas that are weak and require additional work:
_____ Clarity of the presentation.
_____ Accurateness and adequacy of the abstract.
_____ Importance and originality or the subject.
_____ Adequacy of the sample studied.
_____ Statistical analyses.
_____ Appropriateness, clarity, and adequacy of the tables and figures.
_____ Accuracy of the interpretation of results.
_____ Relevance of the Discussion section.
_____ Soundness of the conclusions.
_____ Appropriateness of the references.
What additional information would you need to reproduce this study?
How would you strengthen the Discussion and analyses?
Circle all that apply:
Which sections are too long? Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion
Which sections are too short? Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion
Which tables would you delete? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+
Which figures would you delete? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+
What conclusions would you draw from these results?
Which sections of this manuscript could be misunderstood?
What flaws are evident in the execution of this study?
How could the title be improved?
Answer the following "Yes" or "No":
Did this study raise and resolve an important question?
Does this manuscript conform to APA style?
Is the writing clear and concise?
Are the paragraphs organized to allow for intelligent skimming?
Are the units of measure included and abbreviated consistently?
Is the study interesting?
Byrne, D. W. (1998). Publishing your medical research paper: What they don't teach in medical school. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
Last modified May 2001
Visited times since July 2001
Home to Personality Papers
Home to Great Ideas in Personality