Skip to content
IOP Science

Archives: Questions

Terms and conditions for reviewer rewards

  1. Discounts are granted at the Publisher’s discretion, subject to you submitting a timely and detailed report for the article you reviewed.
  2. You can only use one reviewer discount per article, unless alternative arrangements are specified on a journal’s ‘Publication Charges’ information page.
  3. You can use the discount against article processing charges on any IOP-owned journal, not just the journal for which you reviewed.
  4. You can use your reviewer discount for up to two years from the date your report was submitted.
  5. The discount can only be used to pay the open access article publication charge for an article.
  6. Your reviewer discount can only be used for articles on which you are named as an author (you do not have to be the corresponding or first-named author).
  7. Your reviewer discount can only be used on papers accepted after you completed your review.
  8. No cash equivalent is available.
  9. The reviewer discount cannot be used in conjunction with other discounts such as institutional membership schemes.
  10. When reviewers co-review a manuscript together, both reviewers are entitled to a 10% APC discount. The same terms and conditions apply.

How to claim a reviewer discount on article publication charges

You can claim a reward every time you review an article for the journals participating in the scheme. To use the reward, the procedure below should be followed:

1

Select the open access option when submitting an article through ScholarOne

2

A box will appear that asks if you have recently reviewed an article for IOP Publishing; you will be asked for details of the article(s) you have reviewed

3

We will apply any reward to the invoice for your article publication charge.

2D Materials: 2016 Reviewer Awards

Reviewer of the Year: Dr Haining Wang, Cornell University, United States

Outstanding Reviewers:

  • Professor Alberto Bianco, CNRS, France
  • Dr Cyrill Bussy, University of Manchester, UK
  • Dr Luciano Colombo, Universita degli Studi di Cagliari, Italy
  • Dr Aron Cummings, Institut Catalá de NanociénciaI Nanotecnologia (ICN2), Spain
  • Professor Humberto Gutierrez, University of Louisville, United States
  • Professor Jun He, Chinese Academy of Sciences – National Center for Nanoscience and Technology, China
  • Dr Chris Hinkle, University of Texas at Dallas, United States
  • Dr Jiahao Kang, University of California Santa Barbara, United States
  • Dr Jani Kotakoski, Universitaet Wien, Austria
  • Dr Jose Lado, International Iberian Nanotechnology Laboratory, Portugal
  • Mr Aurélien Lherbier, Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium
  • Mr Zhen Li, University of Southern California, United States
  • Mr Zhong Lin, The Pennsylvania State University, United States
  • Professor Francesco Mauri, Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, France
  • Miss Amber McCreary, The Pennsylvania State University, United States
  • Professor Dr Kosuke Nagashio, University of Tokyo, Japan
  • Professor Marek Potemski, CNRS, France
  • Dr Jenaina Ribeiro-Soares, Universidade Federal de Lavras, Brazil
  • Dr Pablo San-Jose, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, Spain
  • Dr John Schaibley, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
  • Dr Udo Schwingenschlogl, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
  • Dr Eric Suarez Morell, Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria, Chile
  • Professor Dong Sun, Peking University, China
  • Professor Ning Wang, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
  • Ms Tatiana Webb, Harvard University, United States
  • Dr Zhong-Shuai Wu, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China
  • Professor Dr Harold Zandvliet, University of Twente, Netherlands
  • Professor Hui Zhao, University of Kansas, United States

Tell us what you think about being a reviewer

When you submit your report to an IOP journal, you will be invited to complete a short survey about your experience. We are always looking to improve our services and would love to hear from your about how we can continue to support our reviewers. You can also contact the editorial office with any feedback you have about reviewing for us.

Outstanding Reviewer Awards

IOP Publishing is proud to recognise excellence in reviewing, and each year our journal editorial teams select the best reviewers of the year based on the quality, quantity and timeliness of their reviews.

Each journal selects a number of excellent reviewers to receive Outstanding Reviewer Awards.

2024 Winners

View the recipients of the Outstanding Reviewer Awards 2024.

2023 Winners

2022 Winners

2021 Winners

2020 Winners

2019 winners

2018 winners

2017 winners

2016 winners

Article publication charge discount for reviewers

To help recognize the vital contribution our reviewers make to the publishing process, IOP has a reward programme based on open access discounts. When you review an article for an IOP journal, you may claim a 10% discount on the cost of publishing an article in any IOP journal on a gold open access basis. Discounts are valid for two years from the date the review was submitted, and can be applied to an article processing charge (APC) by any co-author.

 

Open access conference series journals

IOP Publishing’s conference series journals provide conference organizers with a cost-effective means of publishing proceedings on an open access basis. Readers can access the content of the journals immediately without payment of a subscription fee or licence. Authors pay no article publication charge and all the costs of publishing the journal are met by the conference organizers.

For more information about the conference series, please visit the Publishing Support homepage (and click on “Conference Organisers”).

Reviewing a draft ebook manuscript

During the preparation of a typescript, you may be contacted by the ebook editor to review a draft of the typescript or selected chapters. Your review will serve as a testimonial and add value to the ebook in assisting the author refine the coverage to best suit the need of readers.

As an expert on this selected material, the editors are seeking your overall impression of the content and appreciate any feedback on how to improve the work.

With the audience in mind, this review should focus on quality, scope, and presentation of the ebook material. IOP Publishing will work alongside the author or editor of the ebook in incorporate your suggestions. Please note this is strictly a content review and you will not be asked to edit for grammar, punctuation, or spelling as each manuscript has a full copy edit and proof read upon submission of the final files.

A tailored reader’s feedback form is provided, which asks for feedback on specific elements of the work. Key focus points while reviewing sample manuscript content are:

1

What is your take on presentation, value, and approachability for the intended audience?

2

Is the structure of the content appropriate?

3

Are all necessary topics included?

4

Are there weaknesses in the proposed content? If so, how can we improve upon this work before we publish the ebook?

Timeframe

It is important to adhere to the review submission date which your Editor will discuss with you upon invitation. Timely return of reviews of manuscripts will help to keep the manuscript on schedule and ensure we meet the set publication date promised to our audience.

If for some reason you are not able to complete the review, alternative names for potential reviewers are most helpful.

 

Reviewing an ebook proposal

The reviewing stage of any proposal is key to ascertaining the quality, worth and potential of the ebook being proposed. As a specialist in the topic of an ebook proposal under consideration you may be approached by the ebook’s editor to provide feedback and your opinion on quality, relevance and scope of the book and how it fits in the wider ebook landscape. Your feedback  is used not only to assess the quality of proposal, but to provide constructive feedback to allow IOP to work with the author to develop and maximize the potential of every title

An ebook proposal review form tailored to IOP Publishing standards will be sent to reviewers to identify strengths and weaknesses of the proposal, proper book structure, and a series of questions to determine if the ebook proposal plan demonstrates to be a viable investment of IOP. Among the series of questions in the proposal review form, the most important are:

1

Has the author properly assessed a need for this ebook and addressed it with quality, clarity, and organization of the material presented?

2

What is the technical level of this ebook?

3

Is the author's coverage of the topic adequate?

4

What are strengths of the proposed ebook? What are weaknesses of this proposed ebook and how can we improve and strengthen this work?

5

Is the author qualified to write this ebook? Are you familiar with the author's work?

6

Is the author aware of any competing books?

7

What is your general overview of the proposal and do you support publication?

It is important to note that IOP Publishing is an international ebook publisher adhering to a global audience. We seek reviews from all regions of the world to ensure the ebook will appeal to our worldwide readership. This includes possible reviews from North America, Latin America, Europe, and Asia/Pacific.

Timeframe

It is important to adhere to the review submission date which your Editor will discuss with you upon invitation. Timely return of reviews  assists the author and IOP in developing  and assessing the project.

If for some reason you are not able to complete the review, alternative names for potential reviewers are most helpful.