Overview of Peer Review Process

Peer review is an essential component of scientific research and a crucial step in the publishing process.

Manuscripts must meet the high-quality standards that have been established for the journal in Technology, reporting original, significant results of interest to the Technology community. Review by external referees is required for acceptance of all research articles, letters, review papers, and perspectives.

Criteria for Publication

It is important that manuscripts are critically evaluated for compliance with the following criteria:

• Importance to the optics and electronics field.

• Novel and interesting. 

• Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.

• Clear logic and smooth English/Chinese expression.

Peer Review Process Step-by-step

Manuscripts first undergo an initial quality/relevance assessment by the editor upon receipt. At this stage, submissions are also screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck's iThenticate software. The Editor assigns the manuscript to an Associate Editor specializing in the relevant subfield. The Associate Editor then initiates a single-blind peer review process by selecting experts in the field as reviewers and forwarding the manuscript to them for rigorous evaluation.

Reviewers provide comments aimed to help create a better manuscript. Reviewers will recommend that:

- Accept the paper directly.

- Accept the paper after revisions.

- Full re-review required after revisions.

- Decline.

Editor makes a publication decision based on the reviews and sends out a decision letter.

If your manuscript needs modifications:

- You may resubmit after revisions have been made (use a response letter to explain each change, point by point).

- Editor decides whether to accept revised manuscript or refer it back to reviewers for further comment.

- Editor makes final decision.

If your manuscript is rejected:

Before submitting elsewhere, act on the reviewers' reports as this will lead to a better paper.

Single-blind Review

Single-blind peer review is critical to our publication process. Therefore, the identity of our reviewers is not released to authors or other reviewers throughout or after the review process.

Confidentiality

Referees should maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process and adhere to the following guidelines:

• Do not discuss manuscripts submitted to Technology with anyone not directly involved in the review.

• If consulting colleagues, inform the editors of their identities.

• Before consulting experts outside your own laboratory, obtain approval from the editors to avoid contacting individuals who may have been excluded.

• As a rule, referees should not reveal their identities to authors or other colleagues, as this may compromise objectivity in later stages of review. Should they feel strongly about making their identities known to the authors, they should do so via the editor.

• We strongly disapprove of any attempt by authors to identify or confront referees, and referees should neither confirm nor deny any speculation regarding their identity.

For the convenience of our authors, Technology provides a Manuscript Transfer Service. If the author agrees to transfer their manuscript to another journal within our group, your review will also be transferred. We will handle your review with the same confidentiality in the next journal as in the original one.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious. If uncertain about a possible conflict, seek guidance from the editors promptly.

Potential conflicts include, but are not limited to:

• Sharing an institutional affiliation with any author.

• Having served as a mentor, mentee, or close collaborator to any author, or jointly holding a grant with them within the past three years.

• Having a manuscript in preparation or under review that is very similar to the one under consideration.