For Reviewers

General Information

  1. Acta Architectonica et Urbanistica (AAeU) is a scientific journal of the Faculty of Architecture, University of Sarajevo, intended to promote and advance science, professional practice, scientific thought, and a scholarly approach to issues in the domains of architecture and urbanism.
    AAeU publishes only previously unpublished scientific articles from all branches of architecture and urbanism, as well as articles from other scientific fields (design, sociology, art history, anthropology, archaeology, ethnology, civil engineering, geodesy, geography, economics, forestry, etc.) if their content is related to issues of architecture and urbanism.
  2. The review process is a critical examination and evaluation of the manuscript’s content, on the basis of which the Editorial Board of AAeU decides whether to publish the assessed manuscript. The purpose of peer review is to determine the scholarly quality of the articles and to establish legitimacy for their publication within the academic community.
  3. The Editorial Board of AAeU ensures at least two independent reviews for each article. The review process is strictly confidential (authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, and reviewers do not know the identity of the authors). In other words, the peer review process involves sending the anonymized manuscript to at least two experts in the topic area. During the review process, the author remains unaware of the reviewers’ identities, and each reviewer remains unaware of the author’s identity as well as of the other reviewer(s)’ identities (double-blind review).
  4. AAeU publishes all positively reviewed articles that are subsequently accepted at the Editorial Board meeting.
    • If two reviewers deliver negative evaluations, the Editor informs the corresponding author that the manuscript is unacceptable for publication.
    • If one reviewer delivers a negative evaluation, an additional opinion is requested from a new reviewer or from the Editor-in-Chief.
  5. Both the reviewers and the AAeU Editorial Board participate in assessing the scholarly merits of the articles and their suitability for publication. However, the final decision on the categorization of articles and on whether to publish them lies with the AAeU Editorial Board, taking into account the reviewers’ opinions.
  6. Peer review constitutes an uncompensated contribution of time by researchers and academic staff. It relies on the goodwill and ethical commitment of reviewers; AAeU does not allocate financial resources for this activity.
  7. Upon a reviewer’s request, the AAeU Editorial Board will provide written confirmation of receipt and acceptance of an authored manuscript for the review process.

Obligations of Reviewers

  1. We kindly request that reviewers complete all fields in the Review Form, including an indication of the recommended article categorization. Reviewers are asked to approach the reading and assessment of the manuscript’s content objectively and thoroughly.
  2. Reviewers are asked to refrain from making personal remarks or criticisms regarding the submitted manuscripts.
  3. In the event of suspicion regarding the originality of the work (violation of research ethics) or a potential conflict of interest, reviewers should notify the AAeU Editorial Board before a final decision on publication is made.
  4. Reviewers have 7 days to decide whether to accept or decline the review of a manuscript.
    • If a reviewer declines the manuscript (with justification), the Editor-in-Chief will select a new reviewer.
    • If a reviewer accepts the manuscript, they must submit their opinion and evaluation (completed Review Form) to the AAeU Editorial Board within 30 days.
  5. Typology of articles for inclusion in scientific bibliographic databases (assessed by the reviewers):
  • Original scientific article
    An original scientific article is the first publication of original research results in a form that allows the research to be repeated and the stated facts to be verified. As a rule, it follows the IMRAD scheme (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) for experimental research, or a descriptive format for descriptive scientific fields. It must be published in a scientific journal with a recognizable peer-review system, as reflected in the instructions to authors.
  • Review article
    A review article provides an overview of the most recent work in a given subject area, or of the work of an individual researcher or group of researchers, with the aim of summarizing, analyzing, evaluating, or synthesizing already published information. It offers new syntheses that also include findings from the author’s own research. It must be published in a scientific journal that clearly employs a peer-review system.
  1. Article categorization—“The article is appropriate for publication with minor corrections” indicates that the AAeU Editorial Board may publish the manuscript without further consultation with reviewers, once the author has implemented the recommended corrections.
  2. Article categorization—“The article is appropriate for publication with major corrections” indicates that the reviewer deems the manuscript publishable but requiring substantial additional work.
    • In this case, we kindly request that reviewers provide the author with instructions and guidelines to assist them in bringing the manuscript up to the required standard.
    • After revision, the AAeU Editorial Board will return the manuscript to the reviewers for re-examination. This process may be repeated until the reviewers or the AAeU Editorial Board arrive at a final decision on publication.
  3. Eliminatory categorization of the article—“The article is not appropriate for publication” signifies that the reviewer identifies serious reasons to refrain from publishing the submitted work.
    • We kindly request that reviewers provide a detailed rationale for such a decision.
  4. Reviewers are not permitted to use, prior to the article’s publication, any insights gained in the course of evaluating the manuscript.