5. Assessing Technical Quality

Methodology

Experimental and/or Computational Methodology

\u003Cp\u003EAssessing a paper’s methodological quality requires asking a few basic questions about the authors’ research, such as:\u003C/p\u003E \u003Cobject type="application/kenticocloud" data-type="item" data-rel="component" data-codename="n8c151f41_9b64_01e9_4c52_430ef9d8f42a"\u003E\u003C/object\u003E \u003Cul\u003E \u003Cli\u003EAre the authors’ fundamental assumptions sound?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EAre the theoretical frameworks underlying the authors’ research question and study approach correct?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EIs prior or related work adequately referenced?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EDo the authors fully describe their approach, procedure, or action?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EDoes the paper provide design guidelines or explain limitations on implementation of theory?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EIf the paper evaluates competing models, do the experiments designed by the authors fully distinguish between the proposed models?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EIf a new mechanism is proposed, are the experiments or computations sufficient to show that the new mechanism is plausible?\u003C/li\u003E \u003Cli\u003EAre the methods logical and clearly described?\u003C/li\u003E \u003C/ul\u003E \u003Cp\u003EDescribe any problems with the methodology in your written review comments for the authors. Fundamental issues in the methodology that the authors cannot address via manuscript revision should lead to a rejection decision.\u003C/p\u003E