Double Peer Review Procedure

Home       The Magazine      Transparency    Code of Conduct    Contact Us

DOUBLE PEER BLIND REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR THE SMC MAGAZINE


The SMC Magazine previews a blind review by two Referees under anonymous shape of the paper sent by one or more authors.

The procedure is arranged by the following stages:

•The Editorial Board establishes the Topics for the “Focus” regarding the new issue of the magazine and the forms of the Call, which will then published on the web site of the Magazine (sustainablemediterraneanconstruction.eu) and diffused via e-mail to the interested scientific community.

•The authors, who intend to publish their contributions, submit an “abstract”, according to the forms indicated in the Call; the contents should regard studies and researches coherent with the Magazine’s subjects or with the  specific Topics of the “Focus” of the issue to be published.

•The Editorial Committee evaluates the abstracts according to the following criteria:

-Suitability with the magazine’s Mission and/or with the specific topics of the issue to be published;

-Originality of the subject and of the research methodology;

-Scientific approach of the, even partially, achieved results.

•The evaluation result is forwarded to the authors, according to the forms indicated in the call. The accepted abstract’s authors/author should submit the full manuscript in English within the deadline indicated in the call. The review procedure starts after the correct and complete reception of the material to be undergone to the referees.

•The referee procedure is run by means of a “double peer blind review”, during which the full papers in English to be reviewed are sent to two different referees, included in the list annually published in the Magazine. The authors do never come to knowledge of the referees’ name who had reviewed their work. To the International Referee Board sectors’ experts belong, who are available to play the work of revision, had accepted and have been engaged in running this task, by means of a subscription of an acceptance format, signed, and of the submission of their Curriculum Vitae. The Editorial Board, under the supervision of the Director of the magazine, defines, for each submitted contribution, the referee couple which, according to the relative expertise, result more compatible with the subjects of the submitted full paper. Moreover, in order to freely run the activity of Review, in a non-prejudicial way, all the references which can attribute the paper to the author, are deleted (eventual notes, bibliographic references, location, research connections and so on). The referees receive, contextually with the written work to be reviewed, also an empty format to fill (Assessment worksheet), which includes: assessment criteria, option of acceptance or not of the full paper, comments for authors, notes for the editor, the final score and the reasons for eventual rejection.

•The work should get the unanimous judgment from both the referees, either it will be accepted or rejected; in case of discordance between the two judgments, a third referee is required, whose  assessment allows to achieve the majority of judgment (2 under 3), and so the final response for the paper is assigned. The Referees, which had provided, together with the paper acceptance, also the comments and the notes, contribute, with their advices, to improve the object of assessment.

•The referees’ judgment is communicated to the author or authors who proceed to the final writing of the manuscript  - which includes both the corrected English version and the author’s mother-tongue one - according to the format required by the Editorial Committee of the magazine.