Reviewer Guidelines

The items below are intended to guide reviewers during the JEED peer review process. If questions arise that are not fully addressed here, please contact the submission’s associate editor or the Editor in Chief.

Editorial Criteria, Paper Types, and Word Counts

Refer to JEED's Editorial Policy for specific information on journal themes, paper types and topics, and suggested word counts.

Criteria for Determining Reviewer Suitability

  1. The reviewer has the disciplinary expertise to assess the quality of the research.
  2. The reviewer can provide a thorough and constructive review in a timely manner.
  3. The reviewer can communicate in a clear, professional way with the author and editors.

Criteria for Manuscript Acceptance

Original Research Papers and Subject-Area Reviews

  1. Research questions or hypotheses are clearly stated and relevant to the field of ecological engineering.
  2. Methodology is sound, study design is clearly described, and statistical methods are appropriate.
  3. Research is placed in context of current understanding of the field, relevant literature is cited and discussed, and findings are placed in the context of ecological engineering design.
  4. Organization is easy to follow and aids in understanding; language and presentation (spelling, grammar, and sentence structure) are clear and no egregious errors are present; inclusive and culturally sensitive language is used throughout.

Research Case Studies and Design Research Portfolios

  1. The project’s objectives are clearly stated and relevant to the field of ecological engineering.
  2. Methodology is sound; project design is clearly described including local/regional context.
  3. Visualizations are meaningful and add value to understanding of the project’s impact.
  4. Project is placed in context of current design practices, relevant literature is cited and discussed, and findings are placed in the context of ecological engineering design.
  5. Organization is easy to follow and aids in understanding; language and presentation (spelling, grammar, and sentence structure) are clear and no egregious errors are present; inclusive and culturally sensitive language is used throughout.

JEED-I: INSIGHTS Articles

  1. The article’s subject is clearly stated and relevant to the field of ecological engineering, and it advances the science and practice of ecological design.
  2. Visualizations are meaningful and add value to understanding of the subject matter.
  3. Original research or project outcomes, if included, have been condensed to share targeted findings that have relevance across the field.
  4. Synthesis or perspectives on emerging topics (such as innovations in teaching, stakeholder engagement, or environmental justice), if included, relate to ecological engineering.
  5. The subject is placed in context of current design practices and ecological engineering, and any relevant literature is cited and discussed.
  6. Organization is easy to follow and aids in understanding; language and presentation (spelling, grammar, and sentence structure) are clear and no egregious errors are present; inclusive and culturally sensitive language is used throughout.

Helpful Suggestions for Reviewers

  1. Ensure that the manuscript is rooted in the fundamentals of ecological engineering and informs ecological design. Also be sure to tailor your review to the type of paper that was submitted (JEED-I: INSIGHTS, research paper, subject-area review, research case study, or design research portfolio).
  2. Review the guidance detailed in Transparent Peer Review. Note that by submitting your review, you agree to the ultimate publication of your comments as part of the published manuscript, either anonymously or by name if you agree.
  3. The focus of the review should be on the published Criteria for Acceptance, listed above. If the presentation (language, organization, clarity, or visualizations) is problematic and limits your ability to provide a thorough and rigorous review, please state your concerns rather than attempting to copyedit the manuscript.
  4. Prepare constructive and respectful comments and suggestions referencing the line numbers in the manuscript. Submit your review and comments using the form provided in Janeway. You may also upload a Word document with tracked changes for minor edits or comments; please be certain your have anonymized your edits and comments in any uploaded files.
  5. Avoid inappropriate requests for citation of your own published papers.

Preparing and Submitting Your Review in Janeway

For general guidance on completing the online review process, refer to Janeway's Reviewer Guide. The instructions below are specific to JEED's peer-review workflow.

Responding to Your Invitation

Even if you cannot accept, we appreciate your prompt response.

  1. When you receive an email invitation to review, read the paper abstract included in the message to determine if the scholarship matches your area of expertise.
  2. Respond to the invitation within 5 business days: Click on the personalized URL in the message body to respond yes or no. You will be taken directly to a Review Request page.  
    • Determine if you can complete the review within 30 days.
    • If yes, click the green "Agree to perform review" button to accept the invitation. You will receive access to the full submission materials.
    • If no, click the red "Decline to perform review button" and suggest alternate reviewers, if possible.
  3. If you have questions or would like to request more time to complete a review, reply to the email requesting additional information before responding to the invitation.
  4. If you agreed to perform the review, save the email containing the personalized URL, or the URL itself, so you can use the link again later. This link will allow you to access the review area without a separate login process.

Preparing Your Review

Please note the review's due date on your personal calendar. You will receive an automatic reminder email 7 days before the date.

  1. Visit the personalized URL that you received in your invitation email.
  2. You will be presented with a Review Request page that includes general instructions, the names of handling editors, the article abstract, downloadable review files, a full list of authors, and a review form.
  3. Read the instructions and abstract, then scroll down to see the Review Files. These files appear in a separate box. 
  4. Click the download icon next to each file name to download copies to your device. Unless otherwise specified, these will be Microsoft Word files. (If you prefer to download all files simultaneously into a ZIP file, click the ZIP icon at the top right of the Review Files box.
  5. Once you have downloaded the files, you may exit Janeway while you read the manuscript and generate your comments.
  6. At any time, you may scroll to the bottom of the page and click the blue "Save progress and continue later" button to pause your work without losing your progress.

This page is under construction.