Technical Notes should offer practical solutions to problems that are of interest to the JAAS readership and merit publication, but neither a full length paper nor an urgent communication is justified. The current JAAS Impact Factor is 3.269. Please consider this when making your recommendation.

Technical notes should be as brief as possible; wherever appropriate authors should use references to the established technique, explaining in full only what is novel about the proposed approach. Figures and tables should be kept to a minimum. Authors are encouraged to make full use of Electronic Supplementary Information in order to present more concise articles.

1. How would you rate this paper? *
   
   Very significant (top 10%)
   Significant (10-25%)
   Routine (25-50%)
   Poor/Unacceptable (bottom 50%)

   
   

2. Are the references up-to-date and accessible, and have all key references been discussed appropriately? *
   
   Yes
   No
   
   Please give details in your comments of any citations that have been omitted.

   
   

3. Does the article's title adequately reflect its content? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

4. Are the objectives, salient features and important quantitative data stated in the abstract? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

5. Does the Introduction adequately relate the current investigation to previous relevant studies? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

6. Are the results clearly given with adequate statistic/validation methods? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

7. Is the article's length commensurate with its content? (Please consider any relevant page limits when answering) *
   
   Yes
   No
   
   If the article is too long, please include in your comments recommendations for deleting text, tables or illustrations.

   
   

8. What is your recommendation? *
   
   Accept - unchanged
   Accept - with minor revisions
   Reconsider - after major revisions
   Reject
   
   Your recommendation cannot be used unless justification is provided. Please support your recommendation in your comments.

   
   

9. If you have indicated that the article should be reconsidered after revision, do you need to re-review the scientific aspects of the revised article? *
   
   Yes
   No
   

   
   

10. Do you wish to be identified as a reviewer of the article? *
    
    Yes
    No
    
    Your answer will not influence the Editorial decision on publication.

    
    

If you recommend acceptance you must provide details to support this decision and you should outline any revisions (which should be achievable within 10 days) and indicate any additional experimental evidence required to support the results (e.g. as Electronic Supplementary Information).

If you recommend rejection you must provide details to support this decision. If you feel that work may be suitable for publication elsewhere please indicate the most appropriate journal and format.

Type/paste your comments here: *

OR Upload a document file - MS Word (.doc), plain text (.txt) or Acrobat (.pdf) files only:

OPTIONAL Comments for Editorial Office only: