Knowledge and Information Systems
A review, whether invited or not, should normally contain a historical perspective on the research and development up to the current date as well as information about the state of the art. However, in the case of a review that mainly seeks to link two areas (see below), the review need not give a historical perspective. The review should also provide a description on research directions that are currently considered the most important. The word "critical" is to be taken seriously. The review should not just be a summary.
The paper should include an extensive bibliography, preferably annotated. Apart from the bibliography, the review can be quite short. A concise review with a substantial bibliography, especially if annotated, can be a better service to the readership than a lengthy review.
The journal welcomes reviews that cover more than one area and that seek to show relationships between them, such as opportunities for and obstacles to using the techniques of the one area to help another. For example, the areas could be learning on the one hand and multi-agent systems on the other. All the areas should normally be within the coverage of the journal, but exceptions can be made.
For each area covered by the review, the author list should include at least one author who is expert in that area. Co-authors can include authors' research students or postdoctoral associates.
It is crucial that a review be written in such a way that it is mostly accessible to professionals in knowledge and information systems who do not have a detailed knowledge of the area(s) reviewed. However, it may also contain a limited amount of technical material that is only likely to be accessible to experts in the area(s).
Critical reviews should be prepared according to the guidelines for ordinary submissions.