Professional Engineering Publishing

REFEREE GUIDE

REFEREEING FOR THE JOURNAL

Submissions to the journal are assessed, online, by independent referees who make recommendations on the suitability of the articles for publication (our Guide for Referees, below, provides information on the criteria for recommendation of publication).
 
Referees are sent reviewing requests by email from our online submission and review system and are asked to inform us whether or not they are able to assess the article for us.  We know that our referees are busy, so we keep in contact to avoid delays.  Our in-house team monitors the progress of all the papers under review and we are happy to extend deadlines or seek additional referees as appropriate.  If you have any queries, just contact us.  

We are grateful for the support of all of our referees in helping authors to enhance and develop their papers.

GENERAL CHECKLIST

When preparing your comments for the author please consider the following:

1. Are the contents of interest and use to professional engineers and associated disciplines?

2. Is the subject matter relevant to the scope of the Journal? If not please suggest a suitable alternative.
3. Is the title a brief and accurate indication of the contents? If not, please suggest a suitable alternative.
4. Is the Abstract concise and a good summary of the paper? Note that Abstracts are used for information retrieval, so the quality of the Abstract is very important.
5. Is the work original? Is there a significant amount of new work in the paper? Has any material been reproduced from unacknowledged sources? 
6. Are you aware of any previous publication by the author(s) which contains a substantial part of the article?
7. Are the contents technically accurate? Have abbreviations been defined? Do the notation and mathematics conform to international convention? Are there any non-SI units (if so, these need to be changed)?
8. Is the article well organised and in logical sections? Are the arguments cogently presented? Are the illustrations and captions clear and informative?
9. Are the references adequate, complete and cited in the text?
10. Are the conclusions supported by the results?
11. Is the category of the article appropriate eg Review, Paper, Technical Note etc? If not, please indicate this in your comments to the author.
12. In your opinion should the article be considered for an Institution prize? If so, please indicate this in your comments for the Editor.

DIFFERENT ARTICLE TYPES

Paper: Describes a piece of complete or substantially complete research, or some aspect of design development, manufacture, operation and maintenance, or engineering education
Review: A critical review of the state-of-the-art with examples of applications in design and profitable manufacture without extensive analysis
Case Study: Describes the application of a technique, procedure or management concept in a real situation
Fast-track Communication: An article in this section should be of current interest or leading edge research deserving rapid publication. Brevity alone does not qualify an article for rapid publication.
Technical Note: A short, interim statement on a research project or description of some new development

REFEREE GUIDELINES

1. You have been approached because of your expertise in a particular area. If you are unable to assess the paper for us, please inform us immediately; your suggestions for alternative referees would be welcome. Your name will not be disclosed to the author(s).
2. Papers accepted for our Journals are expected to be of a high standard. The Editors regard originality, engineering relevance and technical accuracy as being of prime importance. Research papers should add to the knowledge base of engineering. Please refer to the check list before completing your assessment.
3. Constructive comments for the benefit of the author(s) should be typed in the 'Reviewer Blind Comments to Author'. Please do not contact the author as we usually consult at least two referees for advice before making a publication decision.
4. Simple errors of English, typographical errors, incorrect use of upper and lower case letters, etc., will be checked by the editorial staff if the work is accepted for publication.
5. Please confine your assessment to matters of fact. If you have an alternative view to that of the author, or the content raises questions that are outside the scope of the paper, then such matters can be addressed in a discussion following publication. The Editors wish to stimulate written discussion and you are invited to contribute when the paper is published. Please note that the material contained within the paper is confidential and should not be referred to whilst it is under consideration.
6. You may wish to inform the Editor of additional information relating to your assessment of the paper or, indeed, relating to the Journal. The 'Reviewer Confidential Comments to Editor' section should be used for this purpose. Please note that such comments should refer to the work or the Journal and not the author.
7. If you believe that the work has been published or submitted elsewhere, or that plagiarism or other similar malpractice has occurred, please inform us immediately and provide us with sufficient information to investigate the matter further. 
8. In the unlikely circumstance of the paper presenting material that is potentially useful to terrorists, please inform both the Editor and the Journal staff immediately.