- You are here: Home > TAS Special Issue Editor Resources
You are here
TAS Special Issue Editor Resources
- Special Issue editorial policies
- The policies above are a synopsis of the more extensive policies described in the IEEE Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB) Operations Manual. Section 8 governs all editorial requirements for the TAS, including its special issues.
Organization of special issue editors
- The Special Issue Editor-in-Chief (EIC)
- Lead Editors, 1 per ~100 manuscripts
- Technical Editors, 1 per ~10 manuscripts
- Please refer to the Resources for Authors and the TAS Special Issue Author Resources to review the publication process from their point of view.
- ScholarOne Manuscripts workflow
- Policy for editors performing reviews
Editors should note that Special Issues are not IEEE Conference Proceedings! Please disregard content describing IEEE Conferences. Content related to Periodicals is more appropriate.
Lead Editors (LEs) are accountable to the EIC. LEs oversee ~10 technical editors (TEs) and a large block of manuscripts, and LEs may be called upon to nominate TEs for specific assignments. LEs review and approve all decisions made by TEs, and a LE may send back a decision for further review. LEs cannot, however, rescind a decision once approved. LE have responsibility to ensure that decision letters, for both accept and reject decisions, contain adequate and reasonable explanation of the decision for the author. LEs should consult with the EIC outside of the standard workflow in S1M for reject decisions.
LEs have responsibility for keeping the editorial process on schedule by monitoring progress of TEs. A LE may act on behalf of a TE via proxy. LEs should offer advice on the editorial process, especially when adjudication over differing opinions is necessary.
Technical Editors (TEs) work directly with authors and reviewers. TEs are accountable to Lead Editors and the EIC. TEs have the responsibility to carry out the peer review process fairly and without bias. TEs have responsibility to make decisions on manuscripts in a timely manner based on the outcome of peer review. Activities by the TE, reviewer, and author primarily determines the duration of peer review, and TE has authority to set or modify deadlines given to authors and reviewers. TEs should consult with LEs if a deadline is to be reduced.
Since the TE is in a position between the author and reviewer, the TE should facilitate the peer review process by striving for politeness, dignity, and common sense. Many times, reviewers will provide harsh comments, personal criticism, or subjective content. TEs should filter discussion from reviewers. TEs have responsibility to take recommendations from reviewers and distill them into specific comments for authors to improve the manuscript. TEs should also evaluate author responses and manuscript revisions to address previous concerns or deficiencies.A TE must form his/her own opinion about a manuscript, weighing comments and recommendations from reviewers and responses by authors. A TE must be satisfied that the level of revisions are sufficient before making a decision.