IEEE Communications Letters Follows both a Regular and a Double Blind Review Process.
Authors decide whether their submitted papers will be reviewed according to either a “Regular” or a “Double Blind” review process.
Authors will be requested to decide between the “Regular” and “Double Blind” review process during the submission of papers via ScholarOne Manuscript Central.
The procedures and guidelines for both types of review processes are reported as follows.
Double Blind Review Process
If authors opt for this review process, then it will be ensured that the reviewers are not known to the authors and that the authors are not known to the reviewers. The double blind review process is intended to prevent bias or perception of bias towards the authors.
Authors submitting their manuscripts to IEEE Communications Letters according to the double blind review process must comply with the following guidelines:
- Names, affiliations and IEEE grades (e.g., Senior Member IEEE, Fellow IEEE) need to be removed from the manuscript. The writing Author 1, Author 2, etc. need to be used. The same applies to the affiliations of the authors in the footnote.
- References to funding and acknowledgments need to be removed.
- The use of terms like "my" or "our" when referring to authors’ prior work is not permitted. Third person statements need to be used instead, e.g., "In [ref], it was shown that...").
- It is not permitted to publish the manuscript submitted for review, before submission and for the entire duration of the review process including the resubmissions, to e-prints repositories (e.g., ArXiv.org) where the identity of the authors or any other information mentioned above is revealed.
It is worth nothing that names, affiliations, funding, acknowledgments, and IEEE grades will be available in the published version of the paper, if accepted for publication.
Submitted papers that do not comply with these guidelines will be unsubmitted and authors will be asked to modify the papers accordingly.
If a preprint version of the paper is available on e-prints repositories (e.g., ArXiv.org), authors will be asked to modify their type of submission to a regular review process. If this is not possible, the paper will be rejected.
Regular Review Process
If authors opt for this review process, they are allowed to report their names, funding, IEEE grade in the submitted papers, as well as to make their papers available on e-prints repositories (e.g., ArXiv.org).
Regardless of the review process chosen, all papers will be inspected against the guidelines reported in the “IEEE Publication Services and Products Board Operations Manual”.
In particular, special attention will be given to cases of publication misconduct, e.g., those reported in Sections 8.2.4.D and 8.2.4.G of the IEEE manual:
- 8.2.4.D - GUIDELINES FOR ADJUDICATING DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PLAGIARISM
- 8.3.4.G - GUIDELINES FOR EDITORIAL REUSE OF PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED MATERIAL, AND ADJUDICATING INAPPROPRIATE REUSE OF PREVIOUS WORK OR THE FAILURE TO INFORM EDITORS OF PREVIOUS PUBLICATIONS OR MULTIPLE SUBMISSIONS