Knowledge and Information Systems
From this perspective, the reviewer should not only read the papers thoroughly to find flaws, but should also make recommendations to the author(s) as to how the paper might be improved.
If a reviewer feels that his/her decision will be affected, he/she should return the paper to the handling editor, stating the conflict of interest. Examples of cases which could cause conflict of interest include:
Also, if a reviewer feels that his/her confidence in the review is not high (e.g. the technical content of the paper is not in his/her main research area), he/she should return the paper to the handling editor and suggest a more suitable person.
KAIS publishes regular and short papers. A regular paper is either a critical review, discussing the state of the art in an emerging topic area related to KAIS, or a state-of-the-art research report, presenting the results of original research. The title, abstract, introduction, and conclusion of a regular paper should all be informative and coherent. A short paper usually reports on-going research that is original and significant.
Regular papers are normally limited to 15,000 words and short papers should have a maximum of 5,000 words. Short papers have the same acceptance standard but present results that can be stated more concisely. If a long submission is accepted as a short paper, the results must be presentable in a concise form.
|3:||Strong Accept (As good as any top paper in reputable journals)|
|2:||Accept (Comparable to good papers in reputable journals)|
|1:||Weak Accept (I vote acceptance, but won't argue for it)|
|0:||Neutral (I don't like it, but I won't object if others like it)|
|-1:||Weak Reject (I would rather not see this paper accepted)|
|-2:||Reject (I would argue to reject this paper)|
|-3:||Strong Reject (Definitely detrimental to the journal quality if accepted)|
The overall recommendation might be: