Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal of Building Materials and Structures (JBMS) is a peer-reviewed online journal, currently published semi-annually (From 2020, JBMS will publish 04 issues per year). JBMS is a free access journal, and offers a meeting targeted for specialists around the world to publish and discuss all topics related to the building materials and structures.

JBMS topics include, but are not limited to, research on :

  • Elaboration and characterization of building materials.
  • Experimental techniques.
  • Microstructural properties and structural engineering.

ISSN 2353-0057

 

Section Policies

Original Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Short Communications

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Editorial for issue

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Review Articles

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Importance of Peer Reviewing
Peer review is an essential part of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer Reviewers need to recognize the importance of their role and commit to contributing high quality work to the process of publishing scholarly research.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a paper, or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process. If a selected referee agrees to review a paper, they should then adhere to timelines set by the editor.
Confidentiality
Any papers received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Study Ethics
Reviewers are encouraged to comment on ethical questions and possible research misconduct raised by submissions (e.g. unethical research design, insufficient detail on patient consent or protection of research subjects, including animals).
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers are encouraged to be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Source:

AJOL Recommended Peer-Reviewer Guidelines. (Accessed 02 October 2016)

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is based on COPE Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics: COPE. Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, 2011).
Journal of Building Materials and Structures publishes original peer-reviewed articles. We support the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractice. It is important to agree upon standards of proper ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: Editors, Reviewers and Authors.
Editors
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The editor will evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
Reviewers
The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.
Authors
Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper

 


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Civil Engineering and Architecture Faculty- University Amar Telidji of Laghouat JBMS@2019.