The Review Process
JITAg employs a two-tiered review system. That is, the editor first reviews each submission to determine whether or not it is suitable to be sent out to the peer reviewers on the JITAg Manuscript Review Committee.
If the submission is not suitable for review, the editor either rejects the submission or returns the submission to the author with (often substantive) revision suggestions.
The Journal of Information Technology in Agriculture (JITAg) is a peer-reviewed publication. A Manuscript Review committee composed of agricultural IT professionals with backgrounds in a variety of subject areas and from different parts of the country serve on the committee. Reviewers are appointed for two-year terms by the editor, with the approval from the JITAg's Board of Directors. A list of current Manuscript Review Committee members can be found in each issue of JITAg . Instructions for retrieving that listing are given in each issue's Table of Contents.
Peer Review Process
JITAg uses a blind review process. That is, all references to the author(s) are removed before the manuscript is sent out to reviewers.
A set of criteria is used by reviewers to evaluate manuscripts submitted to the JITAg . Reviewers are asked to assign a numerical rating from 1 (weak) to 10 (strong) for each criterion and provide comments on a rating sheet and/or on the manuscript itself. This process is handled through e-mail, unless the reviewer wishes to write on the manuscript and return a hardcopy to the editor.
Feature and Research in Brief manuscripts are reviewed by three committee members. Ideas at Work manuscripts are reviewed by one committee member. Tools of the Trade and Commentary manuscripts are reviewed by the editor.
Reviewers are asked to make a disposition on each manuscript they review and submit it to the editor. They can recommend:
The editor weighs the reviewers' comments and recommended disposition for each manuscript in making the final publication decision. When authors are asked to revise and resubmit manuscripts, the revision may be sent for another round of reviews by the Manuscript Review Committee members or reviewed by the editor. That decision is made at the discretion of the editor.
The two tiers in the JITAg review system add up to a unique combination of academic rigor and professional development. JITAg both "keeps the bar high" and helps authors get published.
Criteria for Evaluation
Criteria vary somewhat depending upon the review category (Feature, Research in Brief, etc.). The criteria for each category are listed below.
Research in Brief
Ideas at Work
Tools of the Trade
Tools of the Trade articles report on specific techniques, materials, books and technology that can be useful to Extension educators. They are reviewed by the editor for appropriateness and relevance for the Journal of Information Technology in Agriculture, and for readability according to the criteria applied to other articles.
Commentary articles state an opinion, offer a challenge, or present a thought-provoking idea on an issue of concern to Extension, including a published article in JITAg . They are reviewed by the editor for appropriateness and relevance for the Journal of Information Technology in Agriculture, and for readability according to the criteria applied to other articles.
Copyright © by JITAg. ISSN xxxx-xxxx.