Peer Review—Magazines


CiSE

 

Reviewer Center

Computing in Science & Engineering magazine is looking for succinct, practical, readable articles that will appeal to experts and non-experts alike. Please select from the menu below for information on


Conduct of the Reviewer

To guarantee fairness to the author, the reviewer for a manuscript submitted to the IEEE Computer Society should abide by a number of guidelines including, but not limited to, the following:

  • Respond within the allotted time.
  • Provide sound, constructive reviews.
  • Assume that manuscripts submitted for publication are not meant to be public.
  • Do not use material from a manuscript you have reviewed.
  • Do not share material from a manuscript you have reviewed with others.
  • Do not distribute copies of a manuscript you have been asked to review unless the material is already public.
  • Tell the Editor, Guest Editor, and Editor in Chief if there are any conflicts of interest involved in reviewing a manuscript.

back to top

  

Do's and Don'ts

    Reviewers should

  • Keep their review objective.
  • Pay attention to organization and technical content by commenting on the work's technical significance and accuracy.
  • Identify and note the type of manuscript (research, tutorial, survey, or case study).
  • Comment on the appropriateness of methods, analyses, results, and conclusions.
  • Suggest specific improvements, identify specific areas that can be removed.
  • Recognize that Computing in Science & Engineering has a word limit between 2,400 to 7,200 words, including 250 words for each figure and table.
  • Look at the references for appropriateness; Computing in Science & Engineering generally accepts 12 maximum.
  • Reject manuscripts that require extensive revision (more than 70 percent).
  • Reject manuscripts with trivial or insignificant results and minor contributions to the subject area even if they are well-written.

   Reviewers should not

  • Review manuscripts they find personally objectionable.
  • Review manuscripts that are not interesting to them.
  • Correct grammar, spelling, and voice. Accepted articles will be edited.
  • Identify themselves or their own work.
  • Include personal comments and biases about the author or subject matter.
  • Reject manuscripts that require simple reorganization.
  • Reject large manuscripts that try to do too much. Instead, they should point out which parts are most important and describe how to revise the manuscript to give it focus.

back to top

  

How to contact us

Publications Coordinator
cise@computer.org

back to top

  

Keywords/Taxonomy

The keywords linked to each manuscript are taken from the ACM taxonomy. Keywords should closely reflect the topic of the manuscript and optimally characterize it. They link manuscripts to appropriate reviewers (i.e. reviewers who share the same keywords as the manuscript).

We encourage reviewers to enter a minimum of two keywords that reflect their expertise when updating their User Information in Manuscript Central. There is no upper limit.

back to top

  

Manuscript Text Requirement


Articles submitted to Computing in Science & Engineering should run between 2,400 to 7,200 words, including all main body, abstract, keyword, bibliography, biography, and table text. The word count should include 250 words for each table and figure.

back to top

  

Preliminary/Conference Version(s)

If the author provided a previously published conference manuscript, the reviewer should check the submission to determine whether a sufficient amount of new material has been added to warrant publication in Computing in Science & Engineering. New results are not required, but the submission should contain expansions of key ideas, examples, elaborations, etc., of the conference manuscript. 

back to top

  

Review Process

Reviewers may use the Public Comments section of the review form to address the author about his or her submission.

We hope that reviewers can submit their review within the given time frame assigned by the Publications Coordinator (normally 3 weeks). The complete review process varies from four to six months, and timely reviewer participation is integral to helping us meet our goals.

The peer-review process allows IEEE Computer Society publications to continually present the highest quality articles to its readers and maintain our reputation for quality and integrity. We appreciate ther reviewers' willingness to volunteer their time and expertise on behalf of Computing in Science & Engineering.

back to top

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool