前言
本文旨在介绍JSS这个计算机领域的SCI期刊是怎么评审的。
评审要求（JSS期刊）
https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-systems-and-software/editorial-board
这个是JSS的editorial board，看来编辑里的中国学者也不是很多（似乎有一部分学者还是在国外大学当老师）。
[1] Elsevier for Reviewers. https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers
The peer review system exists to validate academic work, helps to improve the quality of published research, and increases networking possibilities within research communities.
peer review是为了提高论文质量。
[2] What is peer review? https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/what-is-peer-review
Despite many criticisms about the integrity of peer review, the majority of the research community still believes peer review is the best form of scientific evaluation. This opinion was endorsed by the outcome of a survey Elsevier and Sense About Science conducted in 2009 and has since been further confirmed by other publisher and scholarly organization surveys. Furthermore, a 2015 survey by the Publishing Research Consortium, saw 82 percent of researchers agreeing that “without peer review there is no control in scientific communication.”
竟然还有很多反对peer review的人。之前并不知道有这回事。
这个网页非常给力，给了一个流程图（如下），很完美的解释了peer review的过程。
原来二审是 需要 recommend，（然后editor决定录不录）
看懂了。学到。
Single blind review
In this type of review, the names of the reviewers are hidden from the author. This is the traditional method of reviewing and is the most common type by far. Points to consider regarding single blind review include:
Reviewer anonymity allows for impartial decisions – the reviewers should not be influenced by the authors.
Authors may be concerned that reviewers in their field could delay publication, giving the reviewers a chance to publish first.
Reviewers may use their anonymity as justification for being unnecessarily critical or harsh when commenting on the authors’ work.
Double-blind review
Both the reviewer and the author are anonymous in this model. Some advantages of this model are listed below.
Author anonymity limits reviewer bias, for example based on an author’s gender, country of origin, academic status or previous publication history.
Articles written by prestigious or renowned authors are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than their reputation.
But bear in mind that despite the above, reviewers can often identify the author through their writing style, subject matter or self-citation – it is exceedingly difficult to guarantee total author anonymity. More information for authors can be found in our double-blind peer review guidelines.
这里详细讲了一下single double blind review，但是我觉得对我用处也不是很大，不过这里还是记录一下。也是科普了一下。
Triple-blind review
With triple-blind review, reviewers are anonymous and the author’s identity is unknown to both the reviewers and the editor. Articles are anonymized at the submission stage and are handled in such a way to minimize any potential bias towards the author(s). However, it should be noted that:
the complexities involved with anonymizing articles/authors to this level are considerable
as with double-blind review; there is still a possibility for the editor and/or reviewers to correctly divine the author’s identity from their style, subject matter, citation patterns or a number of other methodologies
这里还有三方盲评，厉害了。
Open review
Open peer review is an umbrella term for many different models aiming at greater transparency during and after the peer review process. The most common definition of open review is when both the reviewer and author are known to each other during the peer review process. Other types of open peer review consist of: 省略。。。
Many believe this is the best way to prevent malicious comments, stop plagiarism, prevent reviewers from following their own agenda, and encourage open, honest reviewing. Others see open review as a less honest process, in which politeness or fear of retribution may cause a reviewer to withhold or tone down criticism.
还有open view，感觉还不错。