Focus and Scope
The Journal of Communication and Information Systems publishes papers containing original research and/or development results, representing an effective and novel contribution for knowledge in the area of Telecommunications. Contributions are accepted in the form of Regular papers, Letters and Tutorials. Regular papers should present a well-rounded treatment of a specific problem with significant contributions, whereas Letters are short communications of recent results. Tutorial papers are intended for dissemination of knowledge of a specific topic in communications to non-experts readers. At the Editor's discretion, other kinds of papers may be published if they are found to be relevant or of interest to the readers. Responsibility for the content of the papers rests upon the authors only.
Peer Review Process
JCIS contributions are accepted in the form of Regular Papers, Letters and Tutorials. Since the SBrT is a sister-society of IEEE-COMSOC, publications follow the same requirements of IEEE-COMSOC publications. Hence, final version of the paper must be provided according the IEEE Transactions template, in the two column version.
Size Limit for Letters: Letters must also follow the IEEE Transactions template, with a size limit of four (4) pages of technical content plus one (1) page only for references, including at the final version.
Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for an Associate Editor who will assign the reviewers, typically two or three, but sometimes more if special advice is needed. The editor then makes a decision based on the reviewers' advice. There are four possible editorial decisions for a proposed manuscript:
- Accept Submission: Only a manuscript that is publishable exactly as written should receive this decision.
- Minor Review: The manuscript is publishable but needs some simple improvements, e.g., grammar and typo corrections, additional plots, additional discussion, etc. When the revision is submitted to the JCIS system, the Editor will check the revisions him/herself, or call on a subset of the original Reviewers.
The maximum number of permitted Minor Revisions is two (2). The deadline for a minor review is 30 days.
- Major Review: The manuscript is somewhat flawed but has enough potential to warrant a revision. The resubmitted manuscript should be significantly improved considering the comments from the previous review round.
The maximum number of permitted resubmissions after a Major Revision decision is two (2). The deadline for a major review is 90 days. If the resubmission is made after the deadline established by the Editor, it will be treated as a new submission.
- Decline Submission: Due to lack of matching on the journal’s scope, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.
Reviewers are welcome to recommend a particular course of action, but they should bear in mind that the other reviewers of a particular paper may have different technical expertise and/or views, and the editors may have to make a decision based on conflicting advice. The most useful reports, therefore, provide the editors with the information on which a decision should be based. Setting out the arguments for and against publication is often more helpful to the editors than a direct recommendation one way or the other.
Editorial decisions are not a matter of counting votes or numerical rank assessments, and we do not always follow the majority recommendation. We try to evaluate the strength of the arguments raised by each reviewer and by the authors, and we may also consider other information not available to either party.
Appeals: Authors can appeal decisions. The first appeal should go to the Editor who handled the manuscript directly. If the Authors and the Editor cannot reach an agreement, then the EiC will make a final decision after a thorough review of the material and discussions. The EiC should be copied on all correspondences related to an appeal.
Otherwise, if the Authors decide to resubmit a previously declined manuscript, the resubmission must be significantly improved. In this case, the Authors must include a document with the submission explaining how the manuscript has changed and why it warrants a new review. The EiC will evaluate this appeal in consultation with the original Editor.
For any general questions and comments about the peer-review process, the journal or its editorial policies that are not addressed here, we encourage the authors to contact the Editors-in-chief.
Questions about a specific manuscript should be directed to the editor who is handling the manuscript.
The Journal of Communication and Information Systems (JCIS) expects and enforces the highest standards of ethics for editors, reviewers, authors, and publisher, namely the Brazilian Telecommunication Society (SBrT). This policy ensures that the peer-reviewed articles published in this journal are essential building blocks in the development of a coherent and respected body of knowledge, and thus serve their purpose to support and embody the scientific method. This goal can only be achieved if the published works are a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and publisher.
The main goal of this document is to define standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, and the society which sponsors the JCIS. We mainly follow the existing SCOPUS requirements and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct, which are briefly described here. This description is based, to a large extent, on a similar document by the KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems.
PUBLICATION AND AUTHORSHIP
An author is generally considered to be an individual who has made substantial intellectual contributions to an article.
All JCIS articles should be original and not published in any other journals. For more information on plagiarism and self-plagiarism, please see the section on Author Misconduct.
Articles should acknowledge and cite the work of others where appropriate, fully and accurately attributing relevant sources.
Articles may acknowledge the funding, support, sponsorship and other forms of input (including that of the university, institute, organization or government) to the work.
Authors must make sure that the submitted article is not under publication consideration or under review in another journal.
Authors must agree to make the revisions suggested by the reviewers and the editorial members of JCIS, or, if that is the case, to argue against some suggestions. If the author refuses to do the revision without acceptable reasons, the submitted article will be immediately rejected.
Authors will be required to correct any errors and to remove incorrect information from the submitted article.
All authors who have made a significant contribution to the article should be included as co-authors. On the other hand, including person(s) who did not contribute to an article in its co-author list is inappropriate.
One of the co-authors should sign a copyright transfer form before the final publication.
Author misconduct includes plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and research misconduct, including falsification or misrepresentation of results. All forms of misconduct are unacceptable and may result in sanctions and/or other corrective actions. Plagiarism includes copying someone else’s work without appropriate credit, using someone else’s work without clear delineation or citation. Self-plagiarism involves the verbatim copying or reuse of an author’s own prior work (even if it involves different co-authors) without appropriate citation, including duplicate submission of a manuscript elsewhere (journal or conference), and submission of two different manuscripts which overlap substantially in language or technical contribution.
EXTENSIONS OF THE AUTHOR’S PRIOR WORK
It is acceptable for conference papers to be used as the basis for a more fully-developed journal submission. Still, authors are required to cite their related prior work, and the journal publication must include substantively novel aspects, such as new experimental results, analysis or theoretical work. Typically, an extended version of a submitted article should add more than 50% substantial contents compared to the previous conference paper. The journal publication should clearly specify how it offers novel contributions when citing prior work. Limited reuse of parts of prior journal publications with a common author is allowed only if it is necessary for the readability of the paper, and the prior work must be cited as the primary source.
PEER REVIEW/RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REVIEWERS
All of the submitted papers will be peer-reviewed. The name of all reviewers will be confidential. All reviewers should be academically qualified to review a submitted article, and they should complete her/his review scores and review comments in time. The review comments should be constructive for the authors.
The reviewer should be fair and unprejudiced in reviewing a submitted article.
The reviewer should not have any conflict of interest with the research, author, or the research funding authorities of a submitted article. In case of a conflict of interest, the reviewer should inform the assigned editor, who will then assign new reviewer(s) to the article.
The reviewer should not reveal any information related to the assigned article to other parties.
The EIC and editor should ensure the quality of the material they publish.
The editor can make a decision on the submitted paper based on reviewers' scores/comments or his/her own discretion.
The EIC and editor's decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based only on the paper's importance, originality, and clarity, and the study's relevance to the scope of the journal.
The EIC or any member of the editorial board should not have any conflict of interest regarding the article under consideration.
Anonymity of reviewers as well as the authors should be maintained by the EIC and editor during the review process.
PUBLISHING ETHICS ISSUES
The EIC and the editorial board are responsible for monitoring and safeguarding the publishing ethics.
The EIC and the editorial board should maintain high levels of intellectual and ethical standards, precluding business and personal needs from compromising intellectual standards.
The EIC should ensure that plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and fraudulent data are not allowed as mentioned above.
The EIC should be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, and apologies as appropriate when needed.
The JCIS and its Editorial Board do not engage in coercive citation since the correct referencing and identification of key prior works is part of authors responsibility only, no matter if they are from journals different from the ones supported by the Publisher of JCIS.
The JCIS was created in 1986 by the Brazilian Telecommunications Society, originally named as Journal of The Brazilian Telecommunications Society, as a means to document and disseminate research results from the Brazilian telecommunications community. Since 2005, the JCIS has been technically sponsored by the IEEE Communications Society (Comsoc), aiming at international audience.