Reviewer Guidelines

As a reviewer for Juwarisa: Jurnal Warisan dan Kebudayaan, your feedback is critical in ensuring the quality and integrity of the journal. Below are the guidelines for reviewing manuscripts, focusing on key sections:

1. Presentation

   • Evaluate whether the manuscript is presented in a clear and logical manner.
   • Consider whether the structure of the article facilitates ease of understanding for the readers.
   • Check if the figures, tables, and references are appropriately formatted and enhance the content.

2. Writing

   • Assess the overall quality of the writing, including grammar, sentence structure, and readability.
   • Ensure that the language used is appropriate for an academic audience and that technical terms are well-defined.
   • Check for consistency in style and tone throughout the manuscript.

3. Length

   • Determine whether the length of the manuscript is appropriate for the topic being discussed.
   • Identify if there are any sections that can be condensed or expanded to improve clarity without sacrificing essential content.
   • Ensure that the paper does not include unnecessary repetition or irrelevant information.

4. Title

   • Evaluate if the title accurately reflects the content of the manuscript.
   • Ensure that the title is concise, clear, and relevant to the field of cultural heritage and studies.
   • Consider if the title is engaging and likely to attract readers interested in the subject.

5. Abstract

   • Review the abstract to ensure it provides a concise and clear summary of the study, including the objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
   • Verify that the abstract reflects the main content of the manuscript and is within the word limit.
   • Assess whether the abstract is informative and can stand alone, giving a complete overview of the research.

6. Introduction

   • Evaluate the clarity and relevance of the introduction, ensuring that it provides appropriate background and context for the research.
   • Assess whether the problem statement, research objectives, and significance of the study are clearly articulated.
   • Check if the introduction leads naturally to the research questions or hypotheses.

7. Method

   • Assess the appropriateness and rigor of the research methods used.
   • Determine whether the methodology is clearly described and replicable.
   • Ensure that the methods are suitable for answering the research questions and are in line with standard practices in the field of cultural studies.

8. Results

   • Review whether the results are presented clearly and logically.
   • Check if the data is well-organized and sufficiently detailed to support the study’s conclusions.
   • Ensure that the results are free from interpretation or discussion, focusing purely on the findings.

9. Discussion

   • Evaluate the discussion section to ensure it interprets the results effectively, linking them back to the research questions and objectives.
   • Check if the discussion places the results in the context of existing literature and contributes new insights to the field.
   • Ensure that any limitations of the study are acknowledged, and suggestions for future research are provided.

10. Conclusion

    • Assess whether the conclusion provides a clear and concise summary of the main findings of the research.
    • Determine if the conclusion effectively addresses the research questions and objectives posed in the introduction.
    • Check if the implications of the findings for the field of cultural heritage are discussed.