Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The International Review of Civil Engineering (IRECE) is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes original theoretical papers, applied papers, review papers and case studies on all fields of civil engineering.
The scope of the Journal encompasses, but is not restricted to the following areas:

infrastructure engineering; transportation engineering; structural engineering (buildings innovative structures environmentally responsive structures bridges stadiums commercial and public buildings, transmission towers, television and telecommunication masts, cooling towers, plates and shells, suspension structures, smart structures, nuclear reactors, dams, pressure vessels, pipelines, tunnels and so on); earthquake, hazards, structural dynamics, risks and mitigation engineering; architectural engineering; environmental engineering; structure-fluid-soil interaction; wind engineering; fire engineering; multi-scale analysis; constitutive modeling and experimental testing; construction materials; composite materials in engineering structures (use, theoretical analysis and fabrication techniques); novel computational modeling techniques; engineering economics.

The Editorial policy is to maintain a reasonable balance between papers regarding different research areas so that the Journal will be useful to all interested scientific groups.

IRECE also publishes letters to the Editor and research notes which discuss new research, or research in progress in any of the above thematic areas.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Research Note

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

After submitting a paper, it will be peer-reviewed.
All our journals are peer-reviewed. Reviewers are appointed by the journal editor.

Peer review has two key functions:
- To act as a filter and determine the validity, significance and originality of the work to ensure only good research is published.
- To improve the quality of research submitted for publication by giving reviewers the opportunity to suggest improvements.

The review procedure

Each submitted paper is subjected to the following review procedure:
- Preliminarly, the Plagiarism Prevention Office (plagiarismprev@praiseworthyprize.org) checks each submission through the Ithenticate’s CrossCheck software, in order to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts (click here to find out more about CrossCheck for Researchers), comunicating the results of the test to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal only in the case of abnormal percentage of similarity;
- the Editor-in-Chief, if not in conflict of interest, decides for general publication suitability;
- in case of conflict of interest, the Editorial Office invites an Editor (Helper editor) to handle the paper;
- the Editor-in-Chief (or the Helper Editor) invites 3 Reviewers to perform an independent review of the article;
- the Journal adopts a single-blind peer review: the Reviewers are aware of the identity of the Authors, but the Authors are unaware of the identity of the Reviewers;
- taking care of the recommendations of the Reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief (or the Helper Editor) decides whether the particular article may be accepted as it is, or it may be revised or rejected;
- the Editor contact the Corresponding Author by email with the editorial decision, Editor comments and Reviewer comments. Authors will be requested to revise their manuscript according to the Reviewers' suggestions, comments and criticisms;
- the revised manuscript must be returned within one month and the review process begins again.

Peer review process flowchart

Ethical Guidelines

Publication Frequency

The Journal is published bimonthly, appearing on the last day of January, March, May, July, September, November.

Journal's Consent Policy

Generic users, readers and authors who register themselves for a private access to the journal website, give implicitly their consent for Praise Worthy Prize to process their personal data in compliance with the Privacy Policy they had sight of.

Reviewers Suggestion

In the submission process, the submitter is requested for kindly suggest three potential reviewers with the appropriate acknowledged expertise to review the manuscript. These reviewers will not be automatically approved by the Managing Editor.
At Step 1 of the submission procedure please provide detailed contact information (address, homepage, phone, verified institutional e-mail address). The proposed reviewers should neither be current collaborators of the co-authors nor have published with any of the co-authors of the manuscript within the last five years, according to the Ethical requirement of the review process. They should be from different institutions of the authors. The submitter may also identify appropriate members of the Editorial Board of this journal or others Praise Worthy Prize's journals as potential reviewers. The submitter may also suggest reviewers from the authors that you frequently cite in your paper.

Username
Password
Remember me