Glossary: Definitions of terms

On this page:




Represents an author of a submission to a journal. Authors may be asked to grade the Reviews' "Helpfulness for Authors" aspect.


An RQC for a single instance of a conference. Created and managed by an Organizer.

The worlds of Conferences on the one hand and Publishers and Journals on the other are largely separate in RQC.

Demo mode

Demo mode is meant for trying out RQC in order to understand how it works. A login session is either in demo mode or not in demo mode for its entire duration.

In demo mode, the user will see a completely separate set of Publishers and Journals and Review cases will (typically) be generated artificially rather than come from an actual Manuscript handling system. Typically, two users team up to try out RQC, create one Publisher and one Journal, and play around with them until satisfied. All email notifications will be sent to the given Publisherpersons or RQguardians only, never to Editors, Reviewers, or Authors. Each web page and Reviewing receipt will state that it is in Demo mode.

All Demo mode data is deleted at the end of the year.


A person (identified by an email address) mentioned as having an editor role in a Review case that an MHS submits to RQC via the API.
Editors can be level-1 ("handling editor"), level-2 ("section editor"), or level-3 ("chief editor"), and any number of each type can occur in a Review case. Most journals have no level-2 editors at all. Editorship pertains to a single Review case, not a whole Journal or Subjournal.

Typically, journals will require level-1 Editors to grade the Reviews of a case and will allow other editors to also grade them.


The process of applying a Review quality definition to a Review case. Performed by filling in (for each review of the case) the questionnaire defined by the "Helpfulness for Decision" and "Helpfulness for Authors" aspects of the Review quality definition.

Each Subjournal decides which of the five possible groups of graders (Co-Reviewers, level-1/2/3 Editors, Authors) are asked to grade and how intensively (can, should, must).


The representation of a journal in RQC. Corresponds to one journal in one Manuscript handling system (MHS). Once the MHS has submitted a Review case to RQC, the handling editor or an RQGuardian will assign it to a Subjournal for grading.

Manuscript handling system

Short: MHS. A software that handles reviewing processes and collects reviews.
For Conferences, RQC will grab the full set of reviewing data from the MHS at a specified time.
For Journals, the MHS will submit reviewing data separately for each submission via RQC's API.


see Manuscript handling system


A person who creates and manages an RQC for a Conference.


The home organization for a number of Journals in RQC. Represents an actual publisher in the real world. Creating a Publisher




see Reviewing receipt

Review case

Represents the information about a single submission that is sent by a Manuscript handling system to RQC. Contains the following information: Submission title, identifier, and Authors; Review texts and Reviewers; involved Editors; various timestamps.

Review Quality Collector

A concept, software system, and initiative for providing reviewers with tangible proof of their reviewing amount and quality.

When used with an article ("an RQC"), it refers to one of the many bins within RQC in which review gradings are collected. Each RQC produces a set of receipts independent of the others. There are two types of RQCs: Conferences and Subjournal years.

Review quality definition


Reviewing receipt





see Review Quality Collector




see Review quality definition



Subjournal year






Thu 2021-08-05 04:07 UTC

Review Quality Collector  © 2012-2021