Call for Papers
Special Issues
Editorial Board
Information for Authors
Information for Reviewers
ACM Links
  ACM Policies  
  Digital Library  
  Issues Archive  

Information for Reviewers


TACCESS is a fully peer-reviewed journal. Each paper will receive no less than three reviews, ideally four.

Papers should satisfy certain minimum criteria before even being considered, including the following:

  • There should be a comprehensive related work section which covers a representative selection of work in the field, in addition to specifically comparing the authors' own work against these
  • There should be a solid evaluation section
  • There should not be an excessive number of self-references
  • There should be no text largely duplicated from previously-published papers.

TACCESS will consider extended versions of conference papers for publication; however, authors of such papers must make substantial enhancements to the conference versions and must alert the Editors that the paper is an extended version, and include a copy of the earlier publication as well as a letter indicating the enhancements the authors have made to the earlier publication.

Some papers can be exempted from some conditions where, say, an evaluation is perhaps not relevant, but in general most good papers will have most of these characteristics. Authors will be given advice about the expected style of the paper in the submission guidelines.

The Review Form

Manuscript Central is used for all TACCESS reviews.

In your review, please endeavor to give the authors useful criticisms which could help them improve their papers. Criticisms can often be difficult to accept, and should be given as courteously as possible, while still remaining useful.

The Review Process

TACCESS aims to return responses to authors within three months of submission. The review process is as follows:

  1. Invitation sent to the reviewer to review the manuscript
  2. Reviewer should confirm agreement to review paper within Manuscript Central at which time the paper and review form will be made available within the system
  3. If the submission is an enhanced version of a previously published conference paper, the reviewer should also receive a copy or accessible link to the conference paper as well as a letter from the authors describing the enhancements that they have made to the conference paper.
  4. Reviewers should complete their reviews, within Manuscript Central. Reviews should be completed as soon as possible to ensure that the Editors-in-Chief will be able to provide authors with timely responses regarding the outcome of the review process.

Working together, the Editors-in-Chief make final decisions regarding the outcome of the review process.

"Conflict of Interest" Definitions and Processes

TACCESS employs the standard ACM Conflict of Interest Policy to managing conflicts of interests with the goal of ensuring the integrity of the review process and the quality of the journal. To ensure the integrity of the process, and minimize opportunities for unintended difficulties, this policy applies to both actual and perceived conflicts of interest. The same process and policies are used to address potential COI involving guest editors for special issues, but guest editors are not permitted to submit manuscripts to the Special Issues they edit.

ACM Home Page