- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
Aim and Scope
The most important objectives of the journal are: generalization of scientific and practical achievements in the field of construction and structures made of various types of concrete, equipment and technologies of the construction industry and their practical application.
The scientific concept of the publication involves the publication of modern achievements in the field of construction, the results of scientific research, the publication of articles describing laboratory research, industrial implementation, mathematical modeling of processes, as well as research results on government grants and assignments.
The magazine publishes detailed case studies, review articles, informing about discoveries and innovations in the world of concrete technologies.
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
6 выпусков в год
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
1. General Provisions
1.1. Publication of scientific articles in the scientific and technical journal “Concrete and Reinforced Concrete” requires mandatory double-blind review of manuscripts submitted by the authors.
1.2. These Regulations determine the procedure and procedure for reviewing original articles submitted to the editorial office, review periods, and requirements for the composition of reviewers.
2. Review procedure
2.1. Manuscripts of articles submitted to the editorial office of the journal, drawn up in strict accordance with the conditions and procedure for accepting manuscripts, are allowed for review.
2.2. After determining whether an article meets the journal profile, it is sent to the reviewer on behalf of the editorial team/editor-in-chief without indicating the name of the author(s). The reviewer is notified that the materials sent to him are the private property of the authors and contain information that is not subject to disclosure. The reviewer is not allowed to make copies or transfer the received materials to third parties.
2.3. After receiving the manuscript of the article, the reviewer reviews it.
The review is compiled in free form, contains a detailed analytical review and includes a reasoned assessment of the scientific (theoretical, methodological and conceptual) level of the article, the degree of novelty and practical significance of the results obtained by the author, the degree of their contribution to the development of scientific ideas in the relevant field of knowledge, a general list and analysis of all noted shortcomings, as well as a statement of the absence of borrowings and a general conclusion about the advisability of publishing the article or its rejection and revision. The review is signed with the original signature of the reviewer.
2.4. In case of a positive conclusion from the reviewer, the manuscript of the article is returned to the editor for publication in one of the issues of the journal.
2.5. If the review contains significant comments and concludes that the article needs to be revised, the manuscript of the article is returned to the author to eliminate the comments. The revised version of the article may be sent for re-review.
In case of a repeated negative review result, the manuscript of the article is rejected and is not subject to further consideration.
2.6. In case of a negative assessment of the manuscript of the article, the editorial board of the journal sends a reasoned refusal to the author(s) with attached reviews without indicating the names of the reviewer(s).
2.7. Reviewing is confidential:
a) the manuscript is sent to the reviewer without indicating the author of the article;
b) the review is sent to the author without specifying the reviewer.
c) any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work must not be opened or discussed with any person not authorized to do so by the editor.
2.8. Reviews and recommendations for each article are stored in the editorial office of the journal for five years from the date of publication of the journal issue in which the work being reviewed is published. Upon receipt of a corresponding request, the editors have the right to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
3. Review deadlines
3.1. The manuscript of the article is sent for review after it is received by the editorial office of the journal.
3.2. The review period is no more than ten working days from the date the manuscript of the article is received by the reviewer. If additional time is needed for reviewing, at the request of the reviewer, this period may be increased, but not more than by five working days.
3.3. If the reviewer fails to submit a review of the submitted article to the editorial board of the journal within the time period established by these Regulations, the article is sent to another reviewer at the discretion of the editors.
4. Composition of reviewers
The reviewers are members of the editorial board of the journal, as well as other persons - doctors or candidates of sciences, whose scientific specialization corresponds to the subject of the manuscript.
5. Responsibilities of reviewers
5.1. Peer review helps the editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with authors, can also help the author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communications, located at the very “heart” of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to undertake the substantive work of reviewing the manuscript.
5.2. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or does not have sufficient time to complete the work quickly should notify the editor of Concrete and Reinforced Concrete and request to be removed from the review process for the relevant manuscript.
5.3. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with reason.
5.4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that is relevant to the topic and manuscripts not included in the reference list. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published must have an appropriate bibliographic reference in the manuscript. The reviewer should also bring to the editor's attention any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work within the reviewer's area of expertise.
6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
6.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions or relationships with any of the authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
Publishing Ethics
When making decisions and resolving possible conflicts, the journal "Concrete and Reinforced Concrete" adheres to recognized international rules governing ethical relationships between all participants in the publishing process: authors, editors, reviewers, publisher and founder.
The statements listed in this section are based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Elsevier's Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, Principles of Transparency, and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing.
- Introduction
1.1. Publishing materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only an easy way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: authors, journal editors, reviewers, and the publisher for the journal Concrete and Reinforced Concrete.
1.2. The publisher not only supports and invests in scientific communication, but is also responsible for ensuring that the published work adheres to all current guidelines.
1.3. The publisher undertakes to maintain the strictest control over scientific materials. Our journal articles provide an unbiased “report” of the development of scientific thought and research, so we also recognize the responsibility to properly present these “reports,” especially in terms of the ethical aspects of publication outlined herein.
- Responsibilities of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The editor of the scientific and technical journal "Concrete and Reinforced Concrete" is personally and independently responsible for making decisions about publication, often in collaboration with the relevant scientific society. The credibility of the work under review and its scientific significance should always form the basis of the decision to publish. The editor may be guided by the policies of the editorial board of the journal Concrete and Reinforced Concrete, being limited by current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The editor may confer with other editors and reviewers (or officials) when deciding to publish.
2.2. Decency
The editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, religious views, origin, or citizenship of the authors.
2.3. Confidentiality
The editor and editorial board of the journal "Concrete and Reinforced Concrete" are obliged not to unnecessarily disclose information about an accepted manuscript to anyone except the authors, reviewers, possible reviewers, other scientific advisers and the publisher.
2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
2.4.1. Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request a co-editor, associate editor, or collaborate with other members of the editorial board in reviewing the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions and relationships with the authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.
2.5. Publication supervision
An editor who provides convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous should report this to the publisher for prompt notification of changes, withdrawals, expressions of concern, and other appropriate statements.
2.6. Engagement and collaboration within research
The editor, together with the publisher, takes adequate response measures in the event of ethical claims relating to the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or demand, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
Founder
- Association "Reinforced Concrete"
Author fees
Publishing in the journal is free for authors.
The editors do not charge authors for the preparation, placement and printing of materials.
Disclosure and Conflict 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.
Plagiarism detection
When reviewing an article, the editorial board of the journal “Concrete and Reinforced Concrete” can check the material using the Anti-Plagiarism system.
If multiple borrowings are detected, the editors act in accordance with the COPE rules.
Preprint and postprint Policy
During the article submission process, the author must confirm that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the journal “Concrete and Reinforced Concrete”, the publisher asks to post a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.
Articles previously posted by the authors on personal or public websites that are not affiliated with other publishing houses are allowed for consideration.
Revenue Sources
The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.
