Sheet of Judgement
to the manuscript sent to the editorial office of Acta Oeconomica Kaposváriensis
Please put an X for each question in the appropriate box(es). You can write your remarks on the last page of this sheet.
1. ORIGINALITY
1.1. According to your knowledge, is this article original?
Yes No Remark
2. SCIENTIFIC CONTENT
2.1. Is the level of this essay appropriate for publication?
Yes No Remark
2.2. Did the authors apply a suitably chosen method?
Yes No Remark
2.3. Do you think that the experiments can be repeated according to the given method and bibliography?
Yes No Remark
2.4. Do you consider the biometrical methods used for planning and the evaluation of experimental data to be appropriate?
Yes No Remark
2.5. Do you think the results to be in accordance with the work done?
Yes No Remark
2.6. Are the conclusions objective and do they come from the experiment(s) done?
Yes No Remark
2.7. Do the statements contain new results?
Yes No Remark
3. TITLE
3.1. Does the title precisely give back the content of the article?
Yes No Remark
3.2. Is the title concise enough?
Yes No Remark
4. Abstract
4.1. Does the abstract list the new results appropriately?
Yes No Remark
4.2. Is the abstract concise enough?
Yes No Remark
5. SETTING UP
5.1. Does the structure of the article suit the instructions in the editorial guidelines?
Yes No Remark
5.2. Is the setting up of the article logical and clear?
Yes No Remark
5.3. Does the usage of literary reference and quotations suit the requirements of the guidelines?
Yes No Remark
5.4. Can the references in the text be found in the bibliography and inversely?
Yes No Remark
6. THE LENGTH OF THE TEXT
6.1. Is the text understandable and short enough?
Yes No Remark
7. Tables
7.1. Are all the tables indispensable for the publication of the article?
Yes No Remark
7.2. Would the completion of the text with further tables improve the understandability?
Yes No Remark
7.3. Are the structure and title of the tables and the heading logical, understandable?
Yes No Remark
8. Figures
8.1. Are all the figures appropriate and necessary?
Yes No Remark
8.2. Do the figures make the article more understandable?
Yes No Remark
8.3. Do the structure and formation of the figures suit the guidlines? Yes No Remark
9. SUGGESTION (Please, underline the appropriate sentence!)
9.1. Can the article be published in this form?
9.2. Can the article be published after smaller -suggested- corrections?
9.3. Should it be rewritten or shortened according to the remarks?
9.4. I don’t recommend its publication because of the reasons given.
9.5. I recommend the publication in another periodical. (If possible, please give the title and address of the suggested periodical.)
Date:
Signature of the critic:
Address:
REMARK
You can write your remarks concerning the marked chapters giving their numbers. You can tell us your suggestions concerning the improvement of the standard of the article or any other remarks.
4