Revision Reject & Resubmit Reject

Body:Comments:
Additional Questions:
1. Originality: Does the paper contain new and significant information
adequate to justify publication?: Jutify with more arguments the necessity
and importante of this research: “
2. Relationship to Literature: Does the paper demonstrate an adequate
understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate
range of literature sources? Is any signficant work ignored?:
3. Methodology: Is the paper’s argument built on an appropriate base of
theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual
work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods
employed appropriate?: it’s not necessary to present:
“Research Questions” and “Research Objectives”.
4. Results: Are results presented clearly and analysed appropriately? Do
the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?: .
5. Implications for research, practice and/or society: Does the paper
identify clearly any implications for research, practice and/or society? Does
the paper bridge the gap between theory and practice? How can the
research be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), in
teaching, to influence public policy, in research (contributing to the body of
knowledge)? What is the impact upon society (influencing public attitudes,
affecting quality of life)? Are these implications consistent with the findings
and conclusions of the paper?:
6. Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case,
measured against the technical language of the field and the expected
knowledge of the journal’s readership? Has attention been paid to the
clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use,
acronyms, etc.:Date Sent: