STRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT

ARCHITECTURE, CIVIL ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING AND ENERGY

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWERS

First-time users: Please click on the word "Register" in the navigation bar at the top of the page and type in the requested information. Upon successful registration, you will be sent an e-mail with instructions to verify your registration. NOTE: If you received an e-mail from us with an assigned user ID and password, DO NOT REGISTER AGAIN. Simply use that information to log in. Usernames and passwords may be changed after registration (see the instructions below).

Repeat users: Please click the "Login" button from the menu above and proceed as appropriate.

Authors: Please click the "Login" button from the menu above and log into the system as "Author." You may then submit your manuscript and track its progress in the system.

Reviewers: Please click the "Login" button from the menu above and log into the system as "Reviewer." You may then view and/or download manuscripts assigned to you for review or submit your comments to the editor and the authors.

To change your username and/or password: Once you have been registered, you may change your contact information, username and/or password at any time. Simply log into the system and click on "Update My Information" in the navigation bar at the top of the page.

Did you forget your password? To have your Username and Password mailed to your registered e-mail address, please select "Login" and click "Send Username/Password". Screen all the requested information exactly as you entered it when you registered. If everything matches, the e-mail will be sent.

System requirements: You must have Adobe Acrobat Reader installed on your computer to view the document files. You may download this software for free from the following address: https://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and publishing a manuscript. Reviews should be conducted objectively and comments, accompanied by a clear explanation, may assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. All scholars, who wish to contribute to publications, are obliged to fairly participate in reviews.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or who knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss manuscripts with anyone without permission from the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should highlight published work that has not been referenced by authors. Each time any previously published results are presented, they should be cited. A reviewer should also draw the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper on which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Reviewers are also encouraged to make comments concerning ethical issues and possible violation of the principles of the research and the publication in a submitted paper, as well as its originality, redundancy or suspected plagiarism.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. The information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and should not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not review manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. The journal has a system to protect the identity of reviewers, and the identity of the persons reviewing respective papers is not revealed.