Guidelines for constructively critiquing academic peer review papers

¶ … Director of the Research Department

When critiquing a colleague's article, keep in mind the three 'Cs' of criticism -- keep your thoughts concise, clear and constructive,. Criticism should be to the point, and should contain suggestions for improvement as well as praise. But simply pointing out what is wrong about an article is not enough. The writer must learn from a critic how to make his or her prose better, and a reviewer should make his or her suggestions specific and targeted, and not just include general feelings or impressions such as 'I didn't like it.'

Some questions to consider when reviewing a colleague's paper: Does the introduction have a clear thesis? Is the topic relevant to the author's target audience? Does each paragraph advance the argument of the author? Is there a clear argument? Does the conclusion tie up the argument (Gocsik, 2004)? Also remember that even if you do not agree with the author, it is important to be objective enough to understand what point the author is attempting to make, and help the author prove that argument with supporting documentation as best he or she can. If more proof is needed, say this, and ideally provide suggestions as to where he or she can look for further evidence. Another important point for a reviewer to consider is the knowledge base of the article's audience. Does the author make assumptions about the knowledge of the likely readership that are too broad, or does the author waste time defining what is common knowledge to the likely audience?