Review Guidelines
Table of Content
- Operational Guide for Accepting and Submitting Manuscript Review
- Technical Guide to Reviewing Manuscripts
1. Operational Guide for Accepting and Submitting Manuscript Review
1. General Requirement
To carry out a review in the Journal of Control Automation and Instrumentation, you need to prepare:
- Computer / laptop with internet connection
- Browser software (Internet Explorer/Firefox/Chrome, etc)
- MS Word software or similar
2. General Procedure
Reviewers will receive an assignment invitation sent via email. After receiving the invitation, all you need to do is log in to the journal site, and do a review process consisting of 5 steps:
- Answer in accepting the assignment. If you do not accept, the assignment will be canceled
- Download the manuscript to review
- Write comments on the review manuscript and fill out the review form
- Upload a reviewed manuscript
- Provide a recommendation to Editor
2.1 Reviewer Assignment
On the Submission screen, you will see the manuscript you have been assigned, Review Assignment. If there are multiple assignment manuscripts, select one by clicking the title column. We recommend choosing the closest deadline.
2.2 Checking Assignment
You will enter the review screen, where you can view abstracts and other information.
2.3 Accept the Reviewer Assignment
First, notify the Editor that you have accepted this review assignment. For that click the "accept review, continue to next step" button. A form will appear to send an e-mail. Fill in your message as necessary, then click Send.
2.4 Download and Reviewing Manuscript
For the next step, please download the manuscript in *.doc format to be reviewed. Read the manuscript with MS Word. Please comment on the manuscript for improvement. Aspects to assess are discussed in the Technical Guide to Reviewing Manuscripts. To comply with the double-anonymous review process, change the reviewer's identity in the comment to "Reviewer." Identity change instructions can be followed at this link.
2.5 Completing the Review Form
After reviewing the manuscript, you can fill out the review form. Please fill in your assessment in the boxes provided. You are requested to give the author instructions on improving the manuscript specifically and in detail.
2.6 Uploading the Reviewed Manuscript
Upload the file with the comment to File Upload. Click the Choose File button, then select the file to upload. After that, click the Upload button and wait until the file appears in the Uploaded files list.
2.7 Review Discussion
If needed, you can add a discussion forum related to this review.
2.8 Recommendation to Editor
The possible recommendations are as follows:
Accept as is |
The manuscript can be accepted as it is, because both the substance and writing are good (highly unlikely) |
Accept with minor revision |
The manuscript needs minor revisions on substance or writing. Upon completing the revisions and meeting the publishing requirements, manuscripts can be published without a second round of review. |
Major revision |
The manuscript requires major revision on substance or writing. After revision, it goes to the second round of review. |
Reject |
The manuscript is rejected for not meeting publishing requirements. |
2.9 Submit the Review Form and the Reviewed Manuscript
Once the above steps are complete, click the Submit Review to Editor button. The email-sending screen will appear as follows:
- Make sure the email body is correct, then click Send.
The review process is complete.
Technical Guide to Reviewing Manuscripts
When reviewing the manuscript, consider the following aspects. Provide notes and suggestions to the author to improve and complete the manuscript if deficiencies are found in the following aspects. Notes and suggestions are written in the form of comments on the review manuscript file downloaded from the OJS system:
- Overall Evaluation:
- Is this article original, novelty, or new contributions, and has important significance for developing the field?
- Does the article have an appropriate writing structure (according to the journal's Author Guidelines) and good linguistic aspects?
- Write comments and suggestions on manuscript improvements briefly, clearly, and specifically.
- Suggestions for detailed changes to style, grammar aspects, and other minor changes (if any) should be written specifically.
- Abstract:
- Does the abstract contain a complete summary (objectives, methods, research results/important findings, and conclusions)?
- Is the word count as required by the journal (200 words)?
- Introduction:
- Is the introduction written effectively, clearly, and well-organized?
- Does the introduction contain sufficient previous research findings and reference it correctly and appropriately?
- Does the introduction contain a clear gap analysis statement that shows where the new contribution lies and how it differs from previous studies?
- Does the introduction contain clear and specific research objectives?
- Methods:
- Are the description of the methodology and experimental procedures written clearly and completely?
- Did the author write the correct reference if the experimental procedure referred to the previous paper?
- Can or should the author include other materials to support research data?
- Results and Discussion:
- Provide suggestions for improvements according to the data presented by the author.
- Do the data from the research and discussion logically relate to a conclusion?
- Are tables, figures, and schematics presented legibly, correctly, and in good resolution?
- Are additional experimental data or additional analyses needed?
- Is there a comparison between the results of this study and previous studies, especially those presented in the introduction?
- Conclusion:
- Are the author's conclusions valid, and do they answer the purpose of the study?
- Are the conclusions claimed by the author supported by sufficient research and data analysis?
- Are there sentences or conclusions that are repetitive or redundant?
- References:
- Are all references in the manuscript written in the bibliography, and vice versa, is what is written in the bibliography referenced in the text?
- Has the bibliography been written correctly and consistently in the format set by the journal?
- Recommendation to Editor:
- Recommendations on whether the manuscript is worthy of publication.
Comments are written on the review script and also filled in the review form available on the OJS system.