Reviewer Guidelines for the Coal Combustion and Gasification Products Journal

  • Is the title informative?
  • Is the title appropriate given the content of the contribution?

  • Is the number of authors appropriate for this study?

  • Does the extended abstract properly convey the entire content of the manuscript?
  • Can the extended abstract stand alone as a summary of the manuscript?

  • Is the topic relevant to the journal's mission and suitable for inclusion?
  • Is the topic relevant to the journal's audience?
  • Does the topic address matters that may be of international importance?

  • Does the contribution have a structured presentation beginning with an introduction and explanation of the problem or matter under investigation?
  • Has the author described and supported a conceptual framework?
  • Is there are clear and concise research question or research hypothesis?
  • Does the author identify and explain the variables under investigation?

  • Are instruments for measurement explained in detail?
  • Are data collection procedures described?
  • Has the author outlined the steps taken to ensure data quality control?
  • Are procedures for data analysis clear?
  • Do data collection and analysis procedures fit the research design?
  • Given the procedures presented, is the study replicable?
  • Are results reported appropriately, correctly, and completely?
  • Does the author provide a sufficient amount of data?
  • Are results and data adequately explained in the text?

  • Tables and figures should supplement text, not repeat material in the text. Are authors making the most efficient use of the interface between the tables, figures, and text?
  • Are all the tables and/or figures necessary?
  • Are more tables and/or figures needed?
  • Are tables clearly labeled and agree with the surrounding text?
  • Are all the figures legible?

  • Is there material that could be placed in a supplementary file?

  • Does the author draw conclusions that follow from the research design, methodology, and results?
  • Are the interpretations of the results and conclusions drawn accurate and not misleading?
  • Is there a discussion of limitations with consideration given to alternative interpretations?
  • Is there a discussion of the practical significance or theoretical implications of the study?
  • Does the author suggest paths for future research?

  • Is the text well written and easy to follow?
  • Does the text use appropriate vocabulary and grammatical structure?
  • Is the paper properly organized?
  • Is the paper concise?

  • Are in-text references accurate and complete?
  • Are the ideas of other authors appropriately acknowledged?
  • Are the references recent?
  • Does the study reference mainly primary sources?
  • Do references correspond with the reference page?
  • Do there appear to be any instances of plagiarism?

  • Is the contribution novel?
  • Does the contribution have generalizability?
  • Does the contribution add to existing research and literature?

  • If you had not been requested to read this manuscript, would you have read it?

  • Do you have any suggested additions?
  • Do you have any suggested deletions?