Effects of Peer Review
Consider the following single and double-blind peer reviewed journals
|
Double-blind Review Process |
||||
|
Name of the Journal |
Name of the Article |
Date Received |
Date Revised |
Date Accepted |
|
The Journal of Electromagnetic Engineering and Science Web of Science
http://www.jees.kr/ |
Design of a Metamaterial
Absorber for ISM Applications |
15 November,
2012 |
2 January, 2013 |
7 February, 2013 |
|
Rectangular Ring
Open-Ended Monopole Antenna for Mobile Dual-Band
Operations |
20 November,
2012 |
21 December,
2012 |
2 January, 2013 |
|
|
Quadruple
Band-Notched Trapezoid UWB Antenna with Reduced
Gains in Notch Bands |
8 June, 2015 |
28 October, 2015 |
5 January, 2016 |
|
|
Loop-Type Ground
Radiation Antenna for a C-Shaped
Ground Plane |
29 November,
2017 |
22 March, 2018 |
19 September,
2018 |
|
|
Design of a
Small Array Antenna with an Extended Cavity Structure
for Wireless Power Transmission |
14 June, 2019 |
15 August, 2019 |
11 September,
2019 |
|
|
Single-blind Review Process |
||||
|
Name of the Journal |
Name of the Article |
Date Received |
Date Revised |
Date Accepted |
|
IEEE
Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters
Scopus Web
of Science
https://tinyurl.com/y2lavyhm
|
A Novel
Bidirectional Antenna With Broadband Circularly
Polarized Radiation in X-Band |
12 November,
2013 |
- |
6 December, 2013 |
|
Circularly
Polarized Patch Array Fed by Slotted
Waveguide |
25 July, 2014 |
- |
25 August, 2014 |
|
|
Wideband
Unidirectional Circularly Polarized Antenna With
L-Shaped Radiator Structure |
28 September,
2015 |
18 February,
2016 |
3 April, 2016 |
|
|
A Compact
Triple-Fed High-Isolation SIW-Based Self-Triplexing
Antenna |
25 January, 2020 |
3 March, 2020 |
4 March, 2020 |
|
|
A High-Gain
Millimeter-Wave Magnetoelectric Dipole Array
With Packaged Microstrip Line Feed Network |
2 July, 2020 |
- |
25 July, 2020 |
|
Inference:
- Double-blind peer reviewed journals take more time for publication.
- Most journals that I came across follow single blind peer review process.
- The articles in single-blind peer review process, contrary to the other counterpart, rarely had a date for revision and were accepted soon after submission. This shows that journals with double-blind peer review process are more thorough with the quality of the content
No comments:
Post a Comment