Journal Menu
► ▼ Journal Menu-
- Materials Home
- Aims & Scope
- Editorial Board
- Reviewer Board
- Topical Advisory Panel
- Instructions for Authors
- Special Issues
- Topics
- Sections & Collections
- Article Processing Charge
- Indexing & Archiving
- Editor’s Choice Articles
- Most Cited & Viewed
- Journal Statistics
- Journal History
- Journal Awards
- Society Collaborations
- Conferences
- Editorial Office
Journal Browser
► ▼ Journal BrowserNeed Help?
Announcements
5 March 2025
Interview with Dr. Srećko Stopić—Winner of the Materials 2024 Outstanding Reviewer Award
The Outstanding Reviewer Award is given annually to recognize those who generously contribute their time to reviewing papers while displaying thoroughness, professionalism, and timeliness.
We are thrilled to announce the following interview with one of the winners of the Materials 2024 Outstanding Reviewer Award, Dr. Srećko Stopić. In the field of academic publishing, reviewers play a pivotal role as the “gatekeepers” of scholarly quality. They meticulously examine each submitted academic paper with their expertise and rigorous approach, ensuring that its value and research quality meet the highest standards.
The following is a short interview with Dr. Srećko Stopić:
1. Could you give a brief introduction of yourself to our readers? What’s your current research area?
I was born on 3 April 1965, in Užice, Serbia, and received my doctorate in 1997 at the Faculty of Technology and Metallurgy in Belgrade. I received the Humboldt Scholarship in Bonn in 2001, and since then I have been working at the Institute for Process Metallurgy and Metal Recycling at the RWTH Aachen University, Germany, as a leader of various research projects and teaching in the subject of the unit operations in non-ferrous metallurgy. My current research areas are process metallurgy, metallurgy of rare-earth elements, recycling, and nanotechnology.
2. What factors make you want to be a reviewer for Materials?
I am a reviewer for various projects and doctoral dissertations, and I am particularly motivated to do reviews for Materials and other MDPI journals.
3. What are your tips on how to prepare a qualified review report?
Each report should have an analysis of the text and experiments, as well as provide conclusions and suggestions that contribute to the improvement of the text and the performed investigation.
4. Based on your extensive reviewing experience, what common problems do authors face?
The biggest problem is fitting all the results into one report and explaining the influence of various parameters, as well as detailing what is innovative about the process.
5. Materials is an open access journal. Is the peer-review process of Materials different from that of subscription journals?
The work at Materials is driven by the teamwork of extremely motivated collaborators, who are very efficient, which is a big difference compared to other magazines.
6. Which research topics do you think will be of particular interest to the research community in the coming years?
The synthesis of new materials and the use of hydrogen in various processes with the most modern methods of material characterization will increasingly be the subject of new research in the coming years.
7. Has being a reviewer affected your preparation for a recent manuscript?
Being a Materials reviewer has a big impact on the preparation of all my papers. There is an inextricable connection between my role as reviewer, author, and Guest Editor of Special Issues at Materials. In each of my roles, I try to give my best and meet the strict requirements of this exceptional magazine. The award that was given to me is additional motivation to contribute to the success of this magazine, to further progress, and to be at the forefront of the MDPI magazine.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me!
