Reviewers Guidelines

The International Journal of Telecommunications (IJT) is sincerely grateful to scholars who give their time to peer-review articles submitted to the journal. Reviewers play a pivotal role in scholarly publishing. The peer review system exists to validate academic work, helps to improve the quality of published research, and increases networking possibilities within research communities. The IJT selection and advisory Board is an international group of scientists, researchers and librarians who represent the major scientific disciplines. Rigorous peer-review is the cornerstone of high-quality academic publishing.

Benefits of the IJT Reviewers

Peer review is an essential part in the publication process, ensuring that the journal maintains high quality standards for its published papers. Reviewing is often an unseen and unrewarded task. We are striving to recognize the efforts of reviewers.

When reviewing for the IJT, you have the following:
  1. Receive a discount voucher code entitling you to a reduction in the article processing charge of a future submission to the IJT must be applied online at submission or any time BEFORE acceptance and BEFORE an invoice has been issued. If your article is rejected the voucher can be reused for your next submission.
  2. Receive a personalized reviewer certificate.
  3. Included in the journal’s periodical acknowledgment of reviewers.
  4. Considered for the journal’s outstanding reviewer award.

Join the IJT Reviewer Database

If you are interested in reviewing articles for our journal, please register your contact details, at the following page.

Invitation to Review

  1. Manuscripts submitted to the IJT are reviewed by at least two (preferred three) experts.
  2. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the quality of the manuscript and to provide a recommendation to the external editor on whether a manuscript can be accepted, requires revisions or should be rejected.
  3. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor for suitability for the journal.
  4. The invited reviewers will be asked to:
    • Accept or decline any invitations quickly, based on the manuscript title and abstract;
    • Suggest alternative reviewers if an invitation must be declined (if applicable);
    • Request an extension in case more time is required to compose a report (Please contact the editorial office if you require an extension to the review deadline);
    • Let us know if anyone else, such as a student or colleague, will participate in writing the review (to complete the review on their behalf or not);
    • Rate the originality, significance, quality of the presentation, scientific soundness, interest to the readers, overall merit and English level of the manuscript;
    • Look at the reference list of the manuscript and check if there are inappropriate self-citations;
    • Provide an overall recommendation for the publication of the manuscript;
    • Provide a reviewing detailed, Review Form;

Rating Criteria of the Manuscript

Please rate the following aspects of the manuscript:

  • Originality/Novelty: Is the question original and well defined? Do the results provide an advance in current knowledge?
  • Significance: Are the results interpreted appropriately? Are they significant? Are all conclusions justified and supported by the results? Are hypotheses and speculations carefully identified as such?
  • Quality of Presentation: Is the article written in an appropriate way? Are the data and analyses presented appropriately? Are the highest standards for presentation of the results used?
  • Scientific Soundness: is the study correctly designed and technically sound? Are the analyses performed with the highest technical standards? Are the data robust enough to draw the conclusions? Are the methods, tools, software, and reagents described with sufficient details to allow another researcher to reproduce the results?
  • Interest to the Readers: Are the conclusions interesting for the readership of the Journal? Will the paper attract a wide readership, or be of interest only to a limited number of people? (please see the Aims and Scope of the journal)
  • Overall Merit: Is there an overall benefit to publishing this work? Does the work provide an advance towards the current knowledge? Do the authors have addressed an important long-standing question with smart experiments?
  • English Level: Is the English language appropriate and understandable?

Publication Ethics

Manuscripts submitted to the IJT should meet the highest standards of the following:

  • Manuscripts should only report results that have not been submitted or published before, even in part.
  • Manuscripts must be original and should not reuse text from another source without appropriate citation.
  • The studies reported should have been carried out in accordance with generally accepted ethical research standards.

Overall Recommendation

Please provide an overall recommendation for the publication of the manuscript as follows:

  • Accept in Present Form: The paper is accepted without any further changes.
  • Conditionally Accepted: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given five days for minor revisions.
  • Reject: The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.

Note that your recommendation is visible only to journal editors, not to the authors.

VISITORS : 20260

© 2022 All Rights Reserved