REVIEWERS

IJCSIS EDITORIAL BOARD

BEST PAPER AWARD

IJCSIS REVIEWERS

NOTES FOR IJCSIS REVIEWERS

Invitation for Qualified Reviewers and Editorial Board Member


The editorial review board is a key part of IJCSIS journal. Researchers and authors are invited to participate in the peer-review process of IJCSIS papers if your research interest matches with the themes of Call for Papers. 

Reviewers are generally expected to complete their review within a two weeks period. Please return with manuscript in two weeks or find a competent alternate reviewer, if you are unable to review. Reviews should be constructive and provide feedback to the authors. The completed review form should be electronically returned to IJCSIS Managing Editor. 

The review process is double-blind; that is, the reviewer does not know who the manuscript author(s) is and the author(s) does not know who has reviewed the manuscript. All reviewers are acknowledged on IJCSIS website, after the publication.

 If you would like to become an IJCSIS reviewer, you should send the following information to the Managing Editors ijcsiseditor@gmail.com. You will receive an email shortly which lets you know whether you have been selected as IJCSIS reviewer or not.


REVIEWER REGISTRATION INFORMATION, email to: ijcsiseditor@gmail.com
Name:
Title (Mr/Mrs/Dr/Prof):
Profession:
Affiliation / Institution or Company:
Country:
Email:
Telephone Number:
Domain of Research (list your areas of expertise):
& A Brief CV (Curriculum Vitae)

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS
Here are some recommendations for writing reviews that help the authors and improve the quality of the journal manuscripts. 
• Your job as a reviewer is to write detailed reviews, even for excellent papers. Tell the authors why you liked their paper, so that the authors know what made them so successful.  
• Even if your opinion is that the paper is poorly written or poorly thought-out, you can still provide constructive criticisms to help the authors, and in the long run, the conference. Think of your goal as convincing the authors of the paper you're reviewing to submit something else next year, but of such high quality that it will be well-reviewed and easily accepted. Give the authors advice on how to do that.
• The worst possible review is a “1” (on our scale of 1 to 8, with 1 being the lowest score) with no written comments. That simply tells the authors that they have been unsuccessful, with no indication of how or why.
• The focus of your review should be on content.  
• Please point out typographic and grammatical errors, unless there are too many of them. 
• Although IJCSIS requires all submitted papers to be polished work, all accepted authors get a brief opportunity to improve the presentation of their paper before camera-ready copy is due. Your detailed feedback may help improve a paper, and in a small way, improve the quality of the journal. 




Comments