The journal is intended to be interdisciplinary and is open to all scientific research in the music-related domains of empirical musicology, psychology, sociology, cognitive science, music education, artificial intelligence, music theory, replication studies and meta-analysis.

Your evaluation should focus on:

• the article’s clarity;
• the quality of its writing;
• its originality;
• the balance of its structure;
• the appropriateness of its references (which also includes adequate referencing to other manuscripts published in the JBDGM);
• its acknowledgement of previous research.

You may either sign your review or conduct it anonymously (the latter being the more common).

We ask reviewers to undertake their review as speedily as possible and with maximum rigor in order to ensure and maintain the high quality of the journal. However, in accordance with the JBDGM Reviewer Policies, reviewers’ comments should be made in a spirit of equitability, courtesy, and kindness. Remarks that are destructive, aggressive, pointlessly sarcastic, ironic, or pejorative have no place in the review process, nor do personal attacks. Conversely, constructive advice to the authors of the article reviewed is welcome.

The broad categories for submitted articles are outlined as follows:

• An article of outstanding quality, accepted for publication without need for revision by the authors (a very rare situation).
• An article of good quality requires only amendments or improvements that amount to a process of minor revision prior to publication. In this case, your comments will be sent to the authors, and a revised version of the article resubmitted to the journal. This revision will not be subjected to the full review process; the editor or one of the associate editors will evaluate the revisions prior to publication.
• An article of good quality but requiring substantial revisions before being acceptable for publication. In this case, your comments will be sent to the authors. Your comments must fully justify the required revisions. The authors will be invited to submit a revised version of the article to the journal. The new submission will be subjected to the full review process, which means that it will be sent to the original reviewers for evaluation prior to any decision on acceptability for publication.
• An article of merely average or plainly inadequate quality is not acceptable for publication. In this case, a rejection may be taken as the equivalent of an absolute decision not to publish the article, though this must be justified in the reviewers’ comments.

Consideration of methodological empirical standards (see JBDGM's methodological guidelines for review) plays an important role in the evaluation of a manuscript’s quality. These standards help to assure the sustainable use of articles for other readers and purposes such as meta-analyses. Thus, it is strongly recommended to consider the JBDGM Methodological Guidelines when evaluating experimental design and statistics.

A final point should be stressed: Absolute confidentiality must be observed on the subjects of articles that are submitted to you (see the JBDGM Reviewer Policies). Unpublished works remain the complete property of their authors; this pertains as much to the methodology employed as to the content. In no circumstances should such articles be read by anyone other than the reviewers and editors, nor should copies be made or distributed.

If you have any further questions, please contact the JBDGM Editor-in-Chief (editors@jbdgm.psychopen.eu).