About the Peer Review Process

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.

What Is Peer Review and Why Is It Important?

Peer review is critical to the publication of high-quality research. It improves article quality by honing key points, identifying errors and holes, and giving authors constructive feedback and suggestions. It also acts as a filter to ensure that research is properly vetted before publication. Reviewers assess the quality, validity, and originality of the research findings.

Reviewers are experts in the field who are independent of the authors and the editorial office.

How Does It Work?

IEEE policy requires at least two qualified reviewers evaluate a submitted article before the editor can reach a decision. (IEEE Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB) Operations Manual Section 8.2.2.A.4).

• The magazine editor invites reviewers who are experts in your article’s subject matter to evaluate the article and provide feedback.
• Reviewers comment on a variety of points such as whether the study is well designed or if the results are too preliminary. Reviewers can help authors hone key points, identify and resolve errors, and generate new ideas.
• The reviewers’ feedback informs the editor’s decision on whether to accept or reject the article.

The most common types of peer review are single-anonymous and double-anonymous review.

• In single-anonymous, the names of the reviewers are not shared with the author but the reviewers are aware of the author’s identity.
• In double-anonymous, 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. Most IEEE publications use the single-anonymous review format.

What Are Editors and Reviewers Looking For?

During the peer review process, editors, and reviewers look for the following.

• 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? 

Understanding the Decision Letter

What happens when you receive the decision letter? After peer review, the editor will consider feedback from the reviewers and then make a decision about the article. The decision letter is delivered to the author via email.

There are three basic types of decisions: Accept, Revise, and Reject. No matter which decision you receive, be sure to read the entire decision letter carefully. Pay special attention to deadlines and next steps.

Accept

Upon acceptance, you may be asked to complete additional steps; for example, providing final high-quality files or signing a publishing agreement. Promptly complete any requested tasks to avoid publication delays. Learn more about your role in article production.

Revise

Revise is the most common type of decision. You will be asked to make changes and submit a revised version for further consideration. The scope of the changes can range from small corrections to major rewriting. The decision letter will include the reviewers’ suggestions on how to improve the article. You should include a point-by-point reply that addresses each suggestion when you submit the revised article.

Reject

If your article is rejected, the decision letter will explain why. The letter may include suggestions for improving your article before you submit it to another publication.

Ethics in 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.

Responsibilities of the reviewer

• Provide a prompt, thorough, and impartial review of the article.
• Give constructive feedback with reasonable suggestions and professional tone.
• Avoid suggesting the addition of irrelevant or unnecessary references.
• Alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues.
• Maintain confidentiality by safeguarding the unique contributions of the author’s work.

Responsibilities of the author

• Accurately report research findings.
• Ensure article meets all publication requirements and adheres to ethical standards.
• Revise article as per reviewers’ suggestions (or give a reason why not).

Learn more about the author’s responsibilities during peer review.

Responsibilities of the publication

The publication’s responsibilities may be fulfilled by a journal Editor or Associate Editor:

• select, invite, and manage reviewers;
• ensure a fair and speedy peer review process;
• synthesize disparate peer review reports and arrive at a final decision;
• maintain confidentiality by preserving the reviewer’s anonymity and by safeguarding the unique contributions of the author’s work;
• uphold all policies of the publication, including ethical policies.

Learn more about the editor’s responsibilities during peer review.

Any questions from authors or reviewers about the peer review process should be directed to the Editor.