Guide for reviewers

Guide for Reviewers

Bulletin of Infrastructural and Architectural Engineering (BIAE)

The Bulletin of Infrastructural and Architectural Engineering (BIAE) values the crucial role of reviewers in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal. Reviewers help ensure that published research meets the highest scholarly standards while contributing to the advancement of knowledge in infrastructure and architectural engineering. Below are detailed guidelines to assist reviewers in evaluating submissions effectively.

1. Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Confidentiality: Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. Do not share or discuss the content with anyone outside the review process.
• Impartiality: Provide objective and unbiased assessments. Avoid personal criticism and focus on the content of the manuscript.
• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the agreed-upon timeframe, typically two to three weeks. If additional time is needed or if you are unable to review the manuscript, please notify the editor promptly.
• Ethical Standards: Report any ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data fabrication, to the editor.

2. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should assess the manuscript based on the following aspects:

• Relevance and Originality:

  • Does the manuscript address a significant topic within the scope of infrastructure and architectural engineering?
  • Does it present novel insights or advancements in the field?

• Quality of Research:

  • Are the research objectives clearly defined?
  • Are the methods and experimental procedures robust and appropriate for the study?
  • Are the results well-documented and supported by evidence?

• Clarity and Structure:

  • Is the manuscript well-organized and logically structured?
  • Is the writing clear, concise, and free of major grammatical errors?
  • Are tables, figures, and references properly used and labeled?

• Impact and Contribution:

  • Does the manuscript contribute to the existing body of knowledge?
  • Does it have potential implications for academia, industry, or policy-making?

3. Writing the Review Report

A comprehensive review report should include the following sections:

• Summary: Briefly summarize the manuscript’s main contributions and key findings.
• Major Comments: Highlight significant issues that need to be addressed, such as methodological flaws, unclear sections, or unsupported claims. Provide constructive suggestions for improvement.
• Minor Comments: Note smaller issues, such as typographical errors, formatting inconsistencies, or unclear phrasing.
• Recommendation: Provide a recommendation based on your assessment, such as:
  • Accept
  • Minor revisions required
  • Major revisions required
  • Reject

4. Conflicts of Interest

If you have any potential conflicts of interest with the authors or their institutions, inform the editor immediately and recuse yourself from the review if necessary.

Your expertise and time are invaluable to the Bulletin of Infrastructural and Architectural Engineering. Thank you for your contribution to upholding the quality of this journal. For questions or concerns, please contact the editorial office at: biae@mri-pub.com.