Peer Review Process

In order for a manuscript to be considered for publication, it must be submitted to the Pharos Journal for Architecture and Planning at that moment and must not have been published, concurrently submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere. The journal anticipates that one of the authors will be given permission to communicate with the journal on any topic pertaining to the paper. All received manuscripts have been properly acknowledged. All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by editors to see whether they are appropriate for formal review. Before undergoing formal peer-review, manuscripts that lack a compelling message, have substantial scientific or technical faults, or are not sufficiently original are rejected.

When a manuscript is deemed appropriate for publication, it is sent to two or more expert reviewers. Although it isn’t crucial, the author is asked to offer the names of two or three qualified reviewers with experience in the field of the submitted work. The reviewers and the author or contributors should not be connected to the same organizations. However, the editor alone has the authority to choose which reviewers to use. The journal follows a double-blind review process, wherein the reviewers and authors are unaware of each other’s identity. Additionally, each manuscript is allocated to an editorial team member who makes a final choice based on the reviewers’ remarks. The corresponding author is informed of the reviewers’ remarks and recommendations (acceptance/rejection/manuscript modifications). If necessary, the author is asked to submit a revised manuscript and offer a detailed response to the reviewers’ remarks. This process is repeated till reviewers and editors take their final decision.

Accepted manuscripts undergo copy editing for format, print style, grammar, and punctuation. The corresponding author receives the page proof. Within three days, the amended proof must be returned by the relevant author. Corrections received after that time may not be able to be included. The entire procedure of sending and receiving proofs, as well as submitting the work for final decision, is done online. The journal immediately publishes articles online as “Ahead of Print” upon approval in order to facilitate a quicker and more extensive distribution of knowledge and information.

Editorial rejection: The manuscript can be rejected if it:

– Not properly structured.

– Does not provide enough information for readers to completely comprehend the authors’ analysis.

– Does not have any new science

– The findings’ distinction between what was previously known and what is new science is not made apparent.

– Lacks up-to-date references.

– Includes hypotheses, ideas, or conclusions that are not entirely backed up by the facts, arguments, and data.

– Does not include enough information about the supplies and procedures so that other researchers can replicate the experiment.

– Absence of precise explanations or descriptions of the experimental design, sample characteristics, tested hypotheses, and descriptive data.

– Describes inadequate statistical analysis or flawed experimental design.

– Has inadequate language quality.

Reviewers for the Pharos Journal of Architecture and Planning (PJArchP) will be selected based on their expertise and contributions to architecture, urban planning, and related disciplines.

The following criteria will guide the selection of reviewers:

– Reviewers have a strong academic background or professional experience in related fields such as architecture, urban design, sustainable development, and planning.

– Reviewers have scholarly publications in prestigious journals in the field.

– Include reviewers from diverse geographical backgrounds to ensure a broad perspective on submissions.

– Encourage reviewers with multidisciplinary expertise in related fields (e.g; environmental science, sociology, and technology) to provide comprehensive evaluations of submissions.

– Reviewers are committed to timely review and constructive feedback, contributing to the journal’s reputation for quality.

– Reviewers have partnerships with global institutions and professional organizations.

By carefully selecting reviewers based on these criteria, PJArchP aims to ensure a rigorous peer review process that upholds the journal’s academic integrity and enhances its credibility within the research community.