An International Journal A publication of the European Association for Signal Processing (EURASIP)
Peer Review Policy for Signal Processing
Peer Review Policy for Signal Processing
The practice of peer review is meant to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Our referees therefore play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of Signal Processing. All manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
Special issues may have different peer review procedures involving Guest Editors. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the Editorial Office, sigpro@elsevier.com.
Initial manuscript evaluation
The Editor-in-Chief first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Reasons for rejection at this stage include insufficient originality and scientific merits, obvious technical flaws, poor writing, inappropriate length, and improper match to the aims and scope of the journal. Obviously, if at this stage or at any other stage in the review process, the article is found to be a double submission, or plagiarising another article, it is also rejected. Those that meet the minimum criteria may be passed on to a Member of the Editorial Board for further evaluation, and if satisfactory, for peer review by a number of external experts.
Type of Peer Review
This journal employs single blind review, where the referee remains anonymous throughout the process, but the author's name is known to the referee.
How the referee is selected
The Editor-in-Chief may choose to assign the paper to reviewers directly, or delegate this task to a Member of the Editorial Board. In both cases, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. Our database is constantly being updated. We welcome suggestions for referees from the author, through these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referee reports
Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original
- Is methodologically sound
- 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. Authors wishing to hire language editing services may refer to the Language Editing section at http://authors.elsevier.com/journal/sigpro for suggestions.
How long does the review process take?
Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within four months, but review time may be longer or shorter in individual cases. Should the referees' reports contradict one another or a report be unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. Revised manuscripts are usually returned to the initial referees within two weeks. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript.
Editor-in-Chief's Decision is final
If the Editor-in-Chief has asked an Member of the Editorial Board to assign referees to a paper, this person gives a decision recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief based on the referee reports. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Final report
The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the Editor-in-Chief, the Member of the Editorial Board and by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees, the Member of the Editorial Board, and the Editor-in-Chief.
Becoming a Referee for Signal Processing
If you are not currently a referee for Signal Processing, but would like to be added to the list of referees for this journal, please contact the Editorial Office at sigpro@elsevie
