Karmic Philosophy and the Model of Disability in Ancient India


Neha Kumari

Research Scholar, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttra Pradesh, India

Peer Review Report

Received Date

31.05.2019

Accepted Date

25.06.2019

Published Date

01.07.2019

Plagiarism

Accepted Level

Reviewer’s Comments to Authors

Major Comments

  1. Very important part of any research study is objective. This paper is not framed with any objective it seems. Only the main purpose of the study has been highlighted in the abstract part. There is no any objective of the study in any part of the paper. Without objective a research study will not be a complete one. So, the author is advised to add the primary and secondary research objectives in the paper.
  2. There is no information on period which the study has been done. It is important to add the period of the study in the paper.
  3. The paper seems that it is secondary data oriented. So it is insisted to the author to add footnote references/reference number in the important data which directly observed from other/secondary sources can be given.
  4. Information is given randomly. There is no particular order why the study particularly taken. So first it needed its research objectives then according to that content of the papers can be aligned.
  5. Author has to give summarized findings/observation from overall study. so that it can be easily understandable what the main purpose and what has done in the study.
  6. There is no information on the research methodology used for the study. Researcher should concentrate on this part and give the methodology of selecting this particular topic.
  7. There is no information on data collection, period of study, techniques used for collecting the data, footnote and findings for the study. The author should focus on the above mentioned parts which are mainly needed for a research study.
  8. Non-frequency of the contents is there which are to be given more concentrate for valuable research study.

Minor Comments

  1. Too many information has given randomly which is not particularly meet out the need for the study. The author should eliminate some data which is not relevant to the study.
  2. For every reference there should be a footnote in the relevant pages.
  3. There was no mention of the limitations of the study, one of which is the apparently high dropout rate.
  4. Researcher can be highlight the research gap and pave the way for future research.