Instructions to Reviewers

Review Process

The JMD review process and approximate times for each step in the process are discussed in the JMD July 2008 Editorial: A manuscript's journey.

Here are a typical manuscript's journey stages. The abbreviations are AU: author, TE: technical editor, AE: associate editor, REV: reviewer. The numbers in parentheses indicate duration in weeks. An asterisk * indicates stage duration with little editorial control, the upper bound frequently violated. Using the upper and lower bounds, and without counting time for author actions and re-reviews, we see that completing a review to the point of production approval can take 3–6 months. Authors are given one month to revise their material, when so requested by the editors.

• AU submits manuscript
• TE assigns AE (1–2)
• AE assigns REVs (2–4)
• REVs perform reviews (4–8)
• AE recommends action (1–3)
• *AU performs minor revisions (1–2)
• *AU performs major revisions (4–6)
• AE requests re-review (1–2)
• REVs perform re-review (4–6)
• AE recommends acceptance (1–2)
• TE recommends acceptance (1–2)
• *AU submits production manuscript (1–2)
• *AU submits 1903 FormTE checks manuscript for minor revisions and production quality (1–2)
• *AU performs any needed revisions (1–2)
• TE approves manuscript for production (1)

Each paper is reviewed by 2-4 reviewers, typically by three. The AEs recommend an action to the TE, who then makes the final decision.

Criteria and Philosophy

Reviewers evaluate each submission with respect to the following criteria: originality, significance, scientific relevance, completeness, acknowledgement of the work of others by references, organization, clarity of writing, clarity of tables, graphs, and illustrations. They also answer the following questions: In your opinion, is the technical treatment plausible and free of technical errors? Have you checked the equations? Are you aware of prior publication or presentation of this work? Is the work free of commercialism? Is the title brief and descriptive? Does the abstract clearly indicate objective, scope, and results?

In addition reviewers provide open form comments to the authors, particularly if they request revisions. They also may provide separate comments to the editors.

Reviewers often ask for guidelines in conducting their review of a JMD manuscript. The philosophy of a good review is addressed in the JMD December 2008 Editorial: A Good Review.

Keywords

Reviewers should identify keywords in areas in which they are comfortable reviewing papers. They can use the list [here] in editing their profile in the ASME Journal Tool. A Tool modification is currently under development that will allow AEs to use a pull-down menu and see the areas of expertise for each reviewer prior to requesting a review. The list will be updated periodically.