The quality of AAS publications greatly depends upon the contributions by our reviewers. Reviewers ensure the accuracy and the quality of published literature through constructive comments and suggestions. We are extremely grateful for you volunteering your valuable time to serve the community.
On this page, you will find guidelines for different types of manuscripts:
For an Original Research Article
For a News & Views Article
For a Review
For a Perspective Article
For a Data Description Article
For a Meeting Report
For a Letter & Notes Article
Please provide an overall summary of the main contribution of the paper and summarize what major issues should be addressed in revision, followed by a separate list of minor suggestions or edits.
Any issues that you would like to make the editors privately aware of can be included separately in the "confidential to the editors" section. If you prefer, you can upload a file with your review and/or an annotated manuscript.
All reviewers are expected to disclose any conflicts of interest to the editors.
Please help ensure that manuscripts comply with the AAS Data Policy.
For an Original Research Article, please check if it constitutes a substantial advancement in our understanding of an aspect of the atmospheric sciences, which includes marine meteorology and geophysics, and the theoretical and applied areas of these disciplines. Please examine and comment on the quality of the research, scientific importance, and quality of presentation. Aspects to be assessed shall include but are not limited to:
1. If the manuscript contains new and significant research findings to justify its publication.
2. If the experimental and/or theoretical methods are described comprehensively.
3. If the conclusions are justified by the results presented.
4. If adequate references are made to other work in the field.
5. If the manuscript has been written in satisfactory English.
1. Is it relevant to current events?
2. Is the discovery new or unexpected?
3. Does this submission address a research challenge?
1. If it provides balanced for and against viewpoints based on an insightful, balanced survey of relevant literature.
2. If it focuses on one topical aspect of a field instead of a general literature survey, and should not be focused on the author's own work. .
1. If it summarizes the progress made to date and includes any very recent, key publications in the area;
2. If it is forward looking and can stimulate discussion and new experimental approaches.
1. If the article contains sufficient information on the dataset (e.g., DOI, data center, URL etc.)
2. If the data collection method is of a high scientific standard.
3. If the dataset has been regularly updated, homogenized, and quality-controlled.
4. If there are missing data that might undermine its usefulness.
5. If the spatial or temporal coverage is good enough to make the data useable.
6. If the data can be reused or the experiment can be repeated.
7. If standard or community formats are used.
8. If the dataset is easy to download.
9. If the article provides a comprehensive description of all the data.
10. If the dataset makes an important and unique contribution to atmospheric and oceanic sciences.
11. The range of applications of the dataset and if it has a sustained use or interest to the science community.
For a Meeting Report, please check if it provides a summary of the workshop/meeting/conference structure, keynote speeches, important talks, and main outcomes. Recommendation for future research would be desirable.
AAS recognition of reviewers:
AAS provides credit for your review to your Publons and Orcid profiles with your permission. Both Publons and Orcid are incorporated into our SchoalrOne manuscript processing system to help you list publications and reviews.
An annual Editor’s Award is given to an individual who has contributed a reviewer’s report of outstanding merit on a manuscript submitted for publication in AAS. The list of Awardees can be found at http://www.iapjournals.ac.cn/aas/news/Editor’sAward.htm.
Letter & Notes are short and brief reports of original research, with a length limit of 5500 words, including figures (one figure is equivalent to 400 words), tables, references, and an abstract of no more than 250 words.
Letter & Notes are less substantial than an Article. For this type of submission, only one specific point should be made (and, of course, that point needs to be novel and supported by results, even if the results are confined to just a few figures). The peer review focuses on whether the research methods used are appropriate and the claims in the paper are sound and have academic merit. Please check:
1. Does this submission discuss an important, novel research result?
2. Will this submission be interesting to many researchers and stimulate further research in the field?