[Skip to Content]

Author Instructions  |  Committee Guides  |  LaTex Template  |  Frequently Asked Questions for Authors
TRBAM Editorial Manager  |  Annual Meeting Homepage

Quick Guide For TRB Committee Reviewers
Reviews will commence in August 2024.

Basic Expectations:

  • Review submissions within your area of expertise and return your comments by September 15
  • Respect the confidentiality of the process
  • Be objective, professional, and constructive in your review
  • Declare any conflicts of interest (professional, personal or financial) and recuse yourself from the review
     

Recommended Actions:

For more information, please visit our full reviewer guidelines PDF. 

To download a one-page printable PDF of this page, click here.

  • Read the Abstract and accept or reject invitation to review as soon as possible
  • Read the paper and form an initial impression before you begin writing
  • If the paper is unintelligible, please return it to the committee with a recommendation to desk reject
  • If a good paper is compromised by poor writing, tactfully note this in your comments and suggest a grammar review; do not provide individual corrections unless they relate to the content
  • Identify specific strengths and weaknesses of the paper in your summary
  • Provide detailed and constructive comments to help with revisions in the text box titled "Reviewer Comments to Authors"
  • Provide an assessment of the paper in the text box titled "Reviewer Confidential Comments to Editor"
  • Do not communicate with the authors directly as this is a blind review process
  • If appropriate, suggest additional relevant literature for the author to consider 
     

Usage of Large Language Models/Generative AI:

  • If you are considering using a large language model [(LLM), e.g. ChatGPT] or Generative AI to help prepare your review for the TRR or TRBAM, you must comply with the following statement based on general guidance from COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics):
  • Reviewers who use AI as a tool to assist in their evaluation of a submission must be transparent in disclosing how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Reviewers are fully responsible for the content of their review comments, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics. In order to receive credit for peer review, the assessment must be your own and not the output of Artificial Intelligence/Learned Language Model/AI Chat Bot, or other modules.
  • Specifically, Reviewers are required to:
  1. Clearly indicate the use of language models in the reviewer questionnaire, including which model was used and for what purpose. 
  2. Verify the accuracy, validity, and appropriateness of any AI content or citations generated by language models and correct any errors or inconsistencies.
  3. Provide a list of sources used to generate review comments, including those generated by language models.
  4. Be conscious of the potential for plagiarism in your review where the LLM may have reproduced substantial text from other sources. 
  5. Acknowledge the limitations of language models in your review comments, including the potential for bias, errors, and gaps in knowledge.

Things to Consider:

  • Does the title and abstract properly reflect the subject of the paper?
  • Are the narrative and the key findings of the paper clearly described?
  • Will the work be of interest to TRB attendees?
  • Is the methodology appropriate to the topic of research?
  • Does the paper make a meaningful contribution to the current literature and/or practice?
  • Are there major conceptual or factual errors?
  • Is any information unclear?
  • Is the paper an appropriate length?

What to Expect:

  • You will receive an invitation with the paper abstract to review from TRB Committee Review;
  • please accept or decline within 5 days
  • Your review is due by September 15
  • If the paper was submitted for publication, you will be asked to provide a 1-10 recommendation to go to the Editorial Board for further review
  • The decision options are Accept or Reject for presentation at TRB
  • You can indicate your willingness to evaluate a revision of the paper if the paper goes on to the Editorial Board
  • You will be copied on the Committee decision letter, and your comments will be sent to the author and Editorial Board by October 1