Reviewers have two important roles: maintaining a high level of quality control for articles published in the Journal, and assisting authors to improve the quality and readability of their papers, if deemed suitable for TJA.

Suitability. 

The first criterion to consider is the paper’s suitability for the Journal.  If it is not suitable, it is best not to spend any further time in reviewing it – other than suggesting a more suitable avenue for publication (we try to be constructive at all times).  

TJA has a readership of both specialists and general readers, and aims to be multidisciplinary in the inclusive, non-silo sense of that word. The specialists (most of whom are either academics or industry specialists) have high levels of expertise in particular disciplines such as telecommunications technology, communications and intellectual property law, telecommunications economics, marketing, media studies or consumer advocacy – but very few have expertise in more than one of these fields.  The general readers (most of whom work in the industry) have a broad understanding and interest in telecommunications, and want to be brought up to date with new developments, including the practical implications of new technologies or regulatory reforms. 

Both classes of readers value good tutorial papers on new developments.  The specialists also value papers that are at the cutting edge of their disciplines, but expect TJA papers to be written for the benefit of the general readership as well.  We therefore exclude papers that are written purely for technologists (steering them to other journals, such as the IEEE Transactions) or purely for lawyers (steering them to law journals) or economists or social researchers.

Please note that TJA interprets telecommunications in the broadest sense, so as to include fixed and mobile networks, the Internet, broadcasting, digital content and consumer experience.   Our readers are interested in a global perspective on new developments, whether they are technological, regulatory, economic, user-experience oriented, cultural, historical or future-oriented. 

Detailed reviewing

It is a good idea to use Track Changes when reviewing the article (supplied in Word), so you can capture any improvements you want to suggest, including correcting typos or poor grammar or spelling.  Before using Track Changes, anonymise yourself by going to Word ‘preferences’ and making your user name suitably anonymous (e.g. ‘Reviewer A’ or ‘Anon’) or else delete your user name.

Criteria applied in judging submissions

Basic features expected of TJA articles are:

–      Timeliness and relevance of the topic

–      Originality  (we normally do not republish articles, and certainly not those that have been previously published online)

–      Readability (very important!!)

–      Well structured arguments (including an Introduction that provides good explanatory background, and adequate ‘Conclusions’)

–      Citation of sources to back up assertions falling outside the author’s own work, and to give due credit to others’ work.

Length

Except where articles have been specially commissioned by the Editorial Board, articles should not exceed 5,000 words (excluding References and the Abstract).

Short articles (1,000 to 2,000 words) are very acceptable, if they meet the other criteria.

In case of doubts …

… do not hesitate to consult the Managing Editor in advance of writing your report.

Outputs required from the reviewer:

(1) Send your anonymised Reviewer’s Report by email attachment email to the Managing Editor.  

(2) (optional) email to the Managing Editor your Track Changes annotated version of the author’s paper, if there are several errors requiring fixing. 

Peter Gerrand - Managing Editor  

December 2010