IEEE Transactions on Games

Reviewer Resources

Peer reviewers fulfill a vital role in the publishing process by giving detailed and professional commentary. It shows editors consider you an authority in your field. You’ll keep abreast of research, learn new and best-practice methods, and start examining your own research from that critical vantage point. Peer reviewing helps you to become a better writer, and perhaps ultimately a more successful published author. All this work is evidence of your standing and contributions in your field, which can boost your CV and help you get ahead.

Most importantly, peer review improves research. So if you are keen on helping push humankind forward through sound science, then peer reviewing is one of the most rewarding things you can do.

IEEE Transactions on Games Associate Editors match the topics covered in an article submission with potential peer reviewers who are experts in those topics. After identifying reviewers, the publication will send out invitations. Most invitations will include information about the article, such as the title and abstract, to help the reviewer decide if they should accept the invitation.

Receiving a peer review invitation

When you receive a review invitation, you should consider whether you have sufficient expertise in the article’s subject area. You should also consider if you can complete the review by the deadline provided in the review invitation.

  • If the answer to either of those questions is “no,” you should promptly decline the invitation. Suggestions of other potential reviewers are always appreciated.
  • If you decide to accept the invitation, follow the instructions in the email to signal your acceptance. You will then receive information on how to access the article and conduct your review.

Submitting feedback

Most publications use an online submission system to facilitate peer review. Once you have accepted the review invitation, you will be given access to the article. You should evaluate the article with the following questions in mind:

  • Is the study well designed and well executed?
  • Is the existing body of relevant work acknowledged?
  • Are the results interpreted and reported correctly? Have all other possible interpretations been duly considered?
  • Are the results overly preliminary or speculative?
  • Does the research contribute to the body of scientific knowledge in the field?
  • Is the article appropriate for this publication?
  • Is the article written in clear, concise language?

Remember that your commentary should always be thorough and professional.

The articles in this journal are peer reviewed in accordance with the requirements set forth in the IEEE Publication Services and Products Board Operations Manual. Each published article was reviewed by a minimum of two independent reviewers using a single-blind peer review process, where the identities of the reviewers are not known to the authors, but the reviewers know the identities of the authors.

Get involved