For Reviewers

The editorial board thank you for reviewing as a reviewer for Bulletin of the JSME. We would like to announce you for guidelines.

About our Peer-review System

Peer-review system in JSME Journals will be processed with online system via "Editorial Manager".

Guidelines for Reviewers

Bulletin of the JSME is a platform for the dissemination of high-quality research in all fields of mechanical engineering. The journals of Bulletin of the JSME publish peer-reviewed original research articles, and thereby stimulate the emergence of new concepts and innovations that promote the advances of mechanical engineering in the world. To be published in the journals, manuscripts must have sufficient significance and be prepared properly, which should be examined by the reviewers and the associate editors in the peer-review process. The reviewer is therefore requested to write a clear and justifiable review report, considering the following aspects:

  1. Does the manuscript present new findings significant for mechanical engineering? Is the method of analysis used in the manuscript sufficiently new? Does the conclusion in the manuscript provide a new concept or a new scope that has a potential to open up a new field in mechanical engineering? Or, does the manuscript contain sufficiently important results from a technological or industrial point of view?
  2. Is the manuscript clearly and logically written in good scientific English? Is the manuscript organized properly?
  3. Are the correctness and reliability of mathematical, numerical, and/or experimental analyses guaranteed with sufficiently reasonable arguments?
  4. Are the references to the pertinent literature adequate?
  5. The journals place importance on sufficiently informative abstract. Does the abstract indicate the subject, objectives, methods, and equipment, together with results and conclusions?
  6. Are figures and tables presented with sufficiently informative captions?
  7. Is the title informative, concise, and clear?
  8. Does the content of the manuscript justify its length?

The reviewers are asked to respond to invitations to review at their earliest convenience and return their review reports promptly: within 3 weeks of the first receipt of the manuscript, and within 2 weeks of each receipt of revised manuscript.

Other guidelines

  1. Reviewers should not reveal to others their names, the details of the review process, or the review results under any circumstances. Do not reveal to others the fact that the reviewers were requested to review the paper and do discuss with others the contents, in whole or in part, in the paper under review.
  2. Reviewers should not utilize the contents of the paper under review for their own benefit until the paper has been published.
  3. When the reviewers find that the contents of the paper are identical with those of any other paper published already by the authors, or that the paper contains or may contain fabricated, tampered, or plagiarized data, report findings to any member of the editorial board of the relevant journal as soon as possible.
  4. When reviewer finds papers containing data with experiments in connection with human subject and animals [a life and living body], reviewer confirms whether the authors explain in the paper that their researches are in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki which is the ethical principle for medical research involving human subjects as well as other ethics, laws, norms and standards. The reviewer should report to the Editorial Board if the paper lacks such a statement as this study has been approved by the institutional committee on ethics or committee on animal experiment.

Copyright © 1996-2017 The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, JSME, All Rights Reserved.