Peer Review Policy and Procedures

In 2008 the IOSCS executive committee adopted the policy of double-blind peer-review for this publication. An author is not told who the reviewers are, and reviewers are not told who the author is; personal references within articles are changed to the third person and the by-line and references to presentations at conferences, etc. are removed from the version distributed to reviewers. When an author submits an article to the editor, it is circulated to the members of the editorial board who determine its fit with the journal. The editor and board members (editorial team) together determine which independent experts are appropriate to the topic of the article and the editor solicits the assistance of two reviewers.

Based on detailed reasons, one of four recommendations is solicited from reviewers:

1. to unconditionally accept the manuscript (with minor corrections as necessary);
2. to accept the manuscript after its author makes major corrections or improvements;
3. to reject the manuscript, but to encourage revision or rewriting, and invite resubmission, which version will be sent out for a second set of reviews;
4. to reject the manuscript outright.

The editorial team makes the decision about the article based upon the recommendations and reviews, and the editor conveys the decision to the author.

Concerning members of the editorial board, the review process is administered only by the Editor.