Are you thinking of submitting a correspondence item to an IEEE Transactions?

Then my best advice for you is to be sure and include a letter with your submission that reminds everyone involved what a correspondence item is all about. On the IEEE Transactions for Audio, Speech and Language Processing website it says,

Correspondence items are short disclosures with a reduced scope or significance that typically describe a use for or magnify the meaning of a single technical point, or provide brief comments on material previously published in the TRANSACTIONS.

Be sure to include this on your letter, citing the IEEE website,
and maybe even include it in your paper itself.
Within your paper, call it a correspondence, rather than an article.
Furthermore, in your letter, explain to the reviewers and associate editor how your paper is a correspondence, and that you are submitting it as a correspondence, and how it, as a correspondence and not research article, should have a reduced scope that provides brief comments on previously published material,
and in fact, on material previously published in the transactions.
Include the references to the previously published material as well.
Stress the point that as a correspondence item it need not propose and test new algorithms, or solve new technical problems; but show how your correspondence does magnify the meaning of a single or few technical points.


3 thoughts on “Are you thinking of submitting a correspondence item to an IEEE Transactions?

  1. It seems like you had the same experience as I had? I submitted a correspondence to an IEEE Transaction of Something twice – one is published by now but it took a rather strange and winding road. The second one is still under review but seems to take an even more strange path.


  2. I have just had the experience of what you call “strange path”.
    I have submitted a letter with comments on a published paper in IEEE Transactions.
    It was rejected with the following main arguments:
    1. “paper in question is poorly cited (only 5 citations) and as such probably should not be published”
    Just to mention that this refers to a paper published on the Nov 2011 issue and the time of comment is on middle of June 2012.
    2. “To make his point he is using very offensive language e.g., “contain many inaccuracies, obscurenesses and inconsistencies.”, instead of accepting facts and other people point of view.”
    This is a only comment of the reviewer. There is no reference on the “facts and other people point of view” that I am not accepting.
    3. “Authors of manuscript, instead on focusing on the merit, are criticizing a form of another publication: “contain many inaccuracies, obscurenesses and inconsistencies.”. This is not acceptable level of the academic discussion”
    And the most important none of the 8 reviewers of my submission claims that my critique is wrong or what is claimed by the paper in question is correct.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s