Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures - Elsevier

SiteStat.jsp

PHYSICA E: LOW-DIMENSIONAL SYSTEMS AND NANOSTRUCTURES

Peer Review Policy PHYSE Peer Review Policy for Physica E: Low-Dimensional Systems and Nanostructures The practice of peer review is to ensure that high quality science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Physica E and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below. Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process from the editorial office on request. Initial manuscript evaluation The editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will normally be informed within two weeks of receipt.Those that meet the minimum criteria are typically passed on to a member of our editorial board, or one or more expert referees. Type of peer review This journal employs single blind review, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process. How the referee is selected Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author though these recommendations are not necessarily used. Referee reports Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: • Is work of sufficient originality • Is of high scientific quality • Is methodologically sound • Is timely • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines • Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions • Correctly references previous relevant work Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process but referees may, if they so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript. How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. The typical time for Physica E is currently two months . Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report be unnecessarily delayed a further expert opinion may be sought. Authors are encouraged to return their revised manuscripts within eight weeks. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript. Final report A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referee(s), and may include verbatim comments by the referee(s). Editor's decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. Becoming a Referee for Physica E If you are not currently a referee for Physica E but would like to be added to the list of referees for this title, please contact one of the main editors (for contact details please go to http://www.elsevier.com/locate/physe) giving key phrases describing your field of expertise. The benefits of refereeing for Physica E include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage. You may also be able to cite your work for Physica E in fulfilment of your professional development requirements for various professional societies and organisations.

Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures