Home/ Instructions

/ for reviwers

Instructions for Reviewers

The review process plays a pivotal role in the publication of an article. It assists the editor in making informed decisions and provides the author with valuable feedback to enhance the manuscript. Our journal employs a double-masked peer review system to ensure fairness and follow the COPE guidelines.

Before accepting a review assignment

Reviewers are encouraged to verify that:

  • The manuscript aligns with their area of expertise.
  • They can dedicate sufficient time to conduct a comprehensive and constructive review.

Basic principles for peer reviewers

When serving as a peer reviewer, it is important to adhere to the following constructive guidelines:

  • Only agree to review manuscripts in your expertise and strive to provide timely assessments.
  • Respect confidentiality throughout the review process and refrain from disclosing any details of the manuscript.
  • Refrain from using any information obtained during the peer-review process for personal gain or to discredit others.
  • Disclose any potential conflicting interests and seek advice if uncertain.
  • Provide objective and constructive feedback, avoiding influence based on the manuscript's origins or the authors' characteristics.
  • Offer feedback professionally and encouragingly, avoiding hostile or derogatory comments.

Preparing Review Reports

When preparing the report, it's essential to ensure the following:

  • The report should provide constructive, accurate, objective, and unambiguous feedback, supported by facts and constructive arguments regarding the manuscript's content.
  • Reviewers should use respectful and professional language.
  • Focus on necessary corrections and clear suggestions for improvements.

During Review Process

Consider the following aspects constructively during the review process:

  • Originality: Look for fresh and innovative ideas in the manuscript.
  • Contribution to the field: Evaluate the manuscript's enrichment of existing knowledge and addressing of research gaps.
  • Technical quality: Assess methodological rigor and data accuracy.
  • Clarity of presentation: Ensure the manuscript's organization and coherence.
  • Depth of research: Evaluate the study's thoroughness and support of conclusions.

Recommendations

Reviewers' recommendations should fall into one of the following categories:

  • Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication.
  • Minor Corrections: Minor adjustments are needed before publication.
  • Major Revision: Significant changes are required for reconsideration.
  • Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form.
Logo

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE

BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

ISSN NO. 2789-4185 (Print)

ISSN NO. 2789-4193 (Online)

Developed & Maintained by Ashik Mahmud