+7 (495) 957-77-43

Peer Reviewing

  1. All the papers, submitted for publication in the “T-Comm – Telecommunications and Transport” journal, undergo reviewing and approval by the editorial board. Peer review is vital to the quality of published research. Your submitted article will be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Feedback from the peer reviewers will contribute to the editor’s decision on whether to accept or reject your article for publication.
  2. The manuscript submitted to the editors is subjected to initial review and verification for compliance to the topics of the journal and formal editorial requirements. If the paper doesn’t comply with the subject-matter of the journal it excludes from further consideration, the author is notified about it.
  3. Then the paper is assigned for reviewing to an expert, who is a member of the editorial council (internal review). The paper can also be submitted for evaluation to an independent expert (peer review). Peer review is a system based on trust. Each party relies on the others to operate professionally, ethically, and confidentially. Learn about the ethical responsibilities of the reviewer, the author, and the publication during peer review.
  4. After reviewing the article may be rejected, sent to the author for revision, or accepted for publication.
  5. The review should include:
    • – General evaluation of the paper’s content and principal judgment on whether it could be published in the journal;
    • – The specific enumeration of errors in the methodology and tools (if any);
    • – Suggestions for improving the text.
  6. Upon receipt of a positive conclusion of the referee the paper is placed in the portfolio of editorial board for further publication. Executive secretary of the editorial board should inform the author about it.
  7. Upon receipt of an unfavorable verdict of the reviewer the paper is discussed on the working group meeting of the editorial board, which makes a decision on rejection of the article or the need for further review by an independent expert.
  8. In case of paper’s rejection, the author sent a notification letter signed by the executive secretary of the magazine.
  9. The final decision on the publication of the paper and approval of the total contents of the journal’s issue are adopted at a meeting of the editorial board.
  10. The procedure for review and approval of articles is from 1 to 2 months, further articles are published in order of priority. The Editorial Board may decide on an extraordinary publication of the paper.
  11. Preparing an article for publication undertaken by the editors includes normal literary editing and fine-tuning of the text according to the internal editorial standards adopted for the journal. All the changes made by the editors are to be coordinated with the author.
  12. The publication reviewed all incoming materials to the editors, corresponding to its category, with a view to peer review. All reviewers are acknowledged experts on the subject of peer-reviewed material and have for the past three years, publications on peer-reviewed articles.
  13. Reviews are stored in the publishing and editorial office for five years.
  14. The editorial board of “T-Comm – Telecommunications and Transport” send copies of reviews in the Ministry of Education and Science for admission to the editor publication prompted.
  15. The most common types of peer review are single-blind and double-blind review. In single-blind, the names of the reviewers are not shared with the author but the reviewers are aware of the author’s identity. In double-blind, neither the author nor the reviewers are aware of each other’s identity. Both models ensure that the reviewer can give an honest and impartial evaluation of the article. Publications in T-Comm journal use the double-blind review format.

What are editors and reviewers looking for?

During the peer review process, editors, and reviewers look for:

  • Scope: Is the article appropriate for this publication?
  • Novelty: Is this original material distinct from previous publications?
  • Validity: Is the study well designed and executed?
  • Data: Are the data reported, analyzed, and interpreted correctly?
  • Clarity: Are the ideas expressed clearly, concisely, and logically?
  • Compliance: Are all ethical and journal requirements met?
  • Advancement: Is this a significant contribution to the field?