Peer Review
Section 1 Review Process
Chinese Space Science and Technology adopts double-blind review system, and the review process is as follows.
1. Initial review
The editorial office will conduct initial review on manuscripts, which checks whether the manuscripts meet the basic requirement or match the aim and scope of the journal. The Academic Misconduct Literature Check (AMLC) (https://check.cnki.net/amlc2/) is adopted to check the similarities and possible plagiarism in manuscripts. The repetition rate cannot exceed 10%.
2. Peer review
For papers that have passed the initial review, a double-blind peer review will be conducted by at least two reviewers (authors and reviewers are not aware of each other's identities). The main criteria for peer review are the innovation and application value of the paper, which includes the following 6 aspects.
1) Is there any academic ethical issue? Is it within the journal's reporting scope?
2) What is the significance of the topic in the paper? Is it a cutting-edge or hot topic?
3) Is the research paper sufficiently innovative? Is the review paper comprehensive, insightful and prospective?
4) Are the arguments, experiments, and references sufficient in the paper?
5) Is the structure, language, and logic of the paper rigorous?
6) Is the aerospace feature distinctive?
3. Final decision
The peer reviewed manuscripts shall be sent to the editor-in-chief for final review, who will make final comments and decide the acceptance of the paper.
Section 2 Other Policies
1. Special Issues and Columns: The review process for special issues and columns follows the same procedure as the regular issues, including identical review and editorial processes, with the editor-in-chief making the final acceptance decision. The editor-in-chief is responsible for all content, including special issues and columns. For special columns, authoritative experts in the field may be invited to serve as guest consultants, overseeing theme proposal, manuscript solicitation, peer review organization, and addressing any publication issues under the editor-in-chief's supervision to ensure fairness in the review process.
2. Submissions by EBMs/Editors/Guest Consultants: Submissions by Editorial Board Members (EBMs)/Editors/Guest consultants must adhere to the journal's review and editorial procedures, ensuring independence from the involved individuals and their research groups. They cannot participate in reviews of manuscripts with whose authors they have conflicts of interest.
3. Appeal and Post-publication Discussions: If authors have objections against the review comments, they can file an appeal. Authors should write an "Appeal Letter" stating the manuscript serial number and send it to the editorial office. The letter needs to provide detailed reasons for the appeal, including a comprehensive and reasonable explanation responding to the review comments, and it must be stamped by the author's institution for validation. The editorial office will decide whether to accept the appeal as appropriate. We warmly welcome authors and readers to participate in discussions on our published articles. Comments can be sent to the editorial office, who will handle them promptly and provide feedback as necessary. Furthermore, the journal actively encourages readers and authors to engage in mutual supervision and offer feedback on pertinent information, aiming to cultivate a vibrant and positive academic environment. Appeal and post-publication discussions shall be sent to office@taikongmedia.com.