High scientific integrity and high academic quality are the central focus at TU Wien Academic Press. All manuscripts, from submission through publication, therefore go through a comprehensive process of quality assurance, including a peer review.
Good scientific practice and quality assurance
- In order to ensure good scientific practice, the TU Wien Code of Conduct and the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity Guidelines on Good Scientific Practice are applied.
- The guidelines and publications of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), wherever appropriate for book publishing, inform the approaches and standards of our publishing house: For example, the questionnaire and the initial publisher’s interview aim at clarifying and avoiding aspects which could later entail “retractions” according to the COPE Retraction Guidelines.
- When attributing authorship, in consultations reference is made to the criteria of the ICMJE.
- In addition, the quality standards for open access monographs and open access anthologies of the University Press Working Group are taken into account in regard to the technical, publishing and substantive aspects.
All publishing enquiries are only subjected to assessment if accompanied by a completely filled out standardised questionnaire and at least one book précis. For the assessment, additional information (established depending on the type of publication) is obtained. For special types of publications like conference proceedings and doctoral theses, additional rules apply to quality assurance. In addition, all manuscripts go through formal checks.
In case of a positive decision, a personal publisher’s interview is subsequently held with the authors or editors and aspects of quality assurance are clarified, including a peer review as well as good scientific practice, scheduling, legal questions and licensing, financial questions, etc.
Our peer review procedure
At TU Wien Academic Press a single blind procedure is the publishing standard. Agreeing to other procedures is possible if quality standards are maintained, e.g. in connection with the variants of the open peer review procedure or if in the course of conferences other procedures (like double blind reviews) come to be used.
Authors and editors have the option of proposing individuals as referees. The choice of reviewers is made by the publisher after additional searching on its own according to substantive professional criteria. Generally, at least two people are engaged to act as external referees.
- An external peer review procedure can only be conducted by referees who are free of any “conflicts of interest.”
- Editors or series editors are not appointed as reviewers.
- In addition to the clearance by the publisher, where the publication of one volume is planned as part of an existing series, there must be consent given by the series editor.
With certain types of publications (conference proceedings, doctoral theses, anthologies), in specific instances an adapted review procedure may be used. For this, the publisher’s rules on quality assurance for conference proceedings or doctoral thesis are applied. The adapted peer review process must be cleared by publisher’s management.
The referees appointed by the publisher provide their opinion by means of a standardised questionnaire and also include in it a summary decision (recommended for publication, recommended for publication with conditions, found unsuitable for publication).
Together with the subsequently reworked text, the authors or editors provide a brief opinion on their changes. Subsequently, the publisher decides on clearance.